^lUVANU, 

o= 


IBi 


,KlOS 


pote 


.vlOS-ANGEU 


THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 


THE 
INSURGENT   THEATRE 


THOMAS  H.  DICKINSON 


NEW  YORK 

B.  W.  HUEBSCH 

MCMXVII 


COPYRIGHT,  1917,  BY 
B.  W.  HUEBSCH 


ftlNTID    IN    THI   VMITID  STATES   Or    AMERICA 


Library 

"PH 


572716 


PREFACE 

IN  this  book  it  has  been  my  purpose  to  treat  the 
recent  events  in  the  non-commercial  theatre  as 
these  refer  to  organization  and  management.  I 
have  purposely  made  no  attempt  to  deal  with  the 
literary  aspects  of  plays  written  for  and  produced 
by  the  so-called  "insurgent"  theatres.  This  mat- 
ter would  raise  a  large  and  interesting  set  of 
questions,  which  are  not,  in  my  judgment,  while 
the  plays  are  in  a  condition  of  development,  ripe 
for  present  treatment.  Those  who  are  interested 
in  play  lists  will  find  repertories  of  the  theatres 
represented  in  this  book  in  the  Appendix.  I  wish 
to  express  my  gratitude  to  the  directors  of  theatres 
and  companies  for  the  courtesy  with  which  they 
have  provided  me  with  information.  I  am  under 
particular  obligation  to  Miss  Helen  Arthur,  Mr. 
Sheldon  Cheney,  Mr.  Charles  Recht,  and  Mr. 
G.  P.  Baker  for  general  material,  and  to  Mr.  John 
B.  Andrews  for  information  as  to  child-labour 
laws  as  they  apply  to  the  theatre. 

THOMAS  H.  DICKINSON. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I  THE  OLD  THEATRE  AND  THE  NEW  ...  9 

II  EXPERIMENTS   IN   SUBSIDY 25 

III  THE  FEDERATED  AUDIENCE 44 

IV  BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW 57 

V  THE  LITTLE  THEATRE 75 

VI    THE  THEATRE  AND  THE  LAW     ....     85 

VII    DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES 97 

VIII    THE  CHILDREN'S  THEATRE 118 

IX    PIONEERS 128 

X    THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES  .      .      .      .151 

XI    NEW  IDEAS  OF  CIRCUIT 186 

XII    THE  NEW  ADVENTURE 199 

XIII    ART  AND  OUTLOOK 214 

APPENDIX  (PLAY  LISTS) 227 

INDEX 245 


THE 
INSURGENT  THEATRE 


THE  OLD  THEATRE  AND  THE  NEW 

A  CHICAGO  critic,  writing  of  Dunsany's  "The 
Gods  of  the  Mountain,"  said  that  the  seven  beg- 
gars were  seven  little  theatre  "movements"  and 
the  mountain  gods  were  an  angry  American  pub- 
lic come  to  turn  them  all  to  stone.  Those  who 
venture  on  experiments  into  new  forms  of  theatri- 
cal activity  may  expect  a  speedy  judgment. 
Whether  like  that  of  the  Chicago  writer  this 
judgment  withers  them  root  and  branch  or 
whether  it  warms  them  with  a  more  sympathetic 
approval  depends  upon  a  great  many  things,  some 
of  them  in  the  critic's  mind,  some  in  general  cir- 
cumstances, and  a  great  many  in  the  personality 
and  equipment  of  the  reformer. 

In  this  book  I  am  trying  to  give  some  form  to 
events  of  a  half  dozen  years  in  the  American 

9 


10       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

theatre.  These  events  are  of  great  variety  and 
present  at  first  view  a  front  of  no  great  consistency. 
At  the  outset  the  only  point  of  agreement  is  the 
implied  conviction  on  the  part  -of  the  workers 
that  the  things  of  the  old  theatre  must  be  de- 
stroyed and  a  new  theatre  be  built  up  in  its  stead. 
This  general  attitude  toward  the  established 
theatre  has  led  me  to  call  the  new  efforts  insur- 
gent. Differing  in  purpose  and  method  all  are 
alike  in  that  they  seek  to  change  present  practice 
to  other  and  presumably  better  forms. 

When  one  speaks  of  the  theatre  he  no  longer 
refers  only  to  play  or  actor  or  even  production. 
The  term  now  covers  all  the  technical,  profes- 
sional, artistic  and  social  connections  of  a  great 
edifice  of  public  amusement.  The  comprehen- 
siveness of  the  institution  itself  is  an  index  of  the 
complexity  of  efforts  of  those  who  undertake  to 
change  it,  and  of  the  wide  field  one  must  cover  in 
attempting  to  survey  these  efforts. 

Nothing  is  more  common  than  discontent  with 
the  state  of  the  theatre.  Did  I  have  nothing 
more  than  this  to  show  there  would  be  no  excuse 
for  a  further  spilling  of  ink.  It  is  the  fact  that 
the  vague  and  rather  uninformed  discontent  of  a 
few  years  ago  has  turned  into  work  of  a  more 
expert  kind,  and  that  this  work  is  now  showing 


THE  OLD  THEATRE  AND  NEW     n 

some  signs  of  orderly  progress,  that  gives  these 
events  such  interests  as  they  may  possess. 

When  one  is  planning  to  make  a  study  of  a 
large  and  well-known  field  it  is  well  if  he  lets  be 
known  the  principles  by  which  he  has  made  his 
survey  and  the  safeguards  he  has  placed  over  his 
own  judgment.  For  my  part  I  admit  that  some 
considerations  have  been  constantly  in  my  mind. 
The  first  of  these  is  that  in  referring  to  a  chang- 
ing order  of  procedure  it  is  good  manners  and  good 
sense  to  avoid  an  appearance  of  censure  against 
the  older  order.  I  do  not  present  the  insurgent 
theatres  as  better  theatres;  I  present  them  as  dif- 
ferent theatres. 

Another  consideration  has  to  do  with  the  temper 
in  which  judgments  are  made.  Naturally  one 
wishes  to  be  fearless  of  judgment  both  in  censure 
and  praise.  There  must  be  no  hailing  of  comets 
as  fixed  stars  or  of  promising  plays  as  the  great 
American  drama.  In  freeing  oneself  from  the 
illusion  of  the  mystery  of  the  stage  one  must  not 
surrender  to  the  illusion  of  revolution.  At  the 
same  time  the  first  requirement  of  a  free  criticism 
is  a  catholicity  of  understanding.  The  variety 
and  distribution  of  the  materials  in  the  theatre 
makes  summary  judgment  difficult.  To  pass 
judgment  on  the  work  of  a  particular  artist  is  quite 


12       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

unjust,  for  not  once  in  a  hundred  chances  has 
that  artist  been  truly  in  control  of  his  materials. 
Moreover  the  governing  factor  of  a  theatrical  en- 
terprise is  quite  likely  to  keep  itself  hidden. 
Nothing  is  more  footless  than  to  render  praise  or 
blame  to  a  complex  of  accidental  forces  that  by 
one  means  or  another  have  got  themselves  gathered 
together  into  a  stage  production.  Criticism  in 
the  theatre  has  become  too  much  like  judgment  on 
a  chapter  of  mischances.  He  who  would  draw 
conclusions  can  consider  only  motives  and  efforts. 
At  the  present  time  results  lie  outside  the  power 
of  any  man. 

I  have  another  working  basis  in  my  thinking 
about  the  activities  of  the  insurgent  theatre.  It 
seems  well  to  distinguish  between  the  ostensible 
purpose,  the  "philosophy"  which  workers  con- 
tinually avow  for  their  efforts  and  the  driving 
power,  the  efficient  cause  which  keeps  them  going. 
The  two  are  not  the  same  thing.  And  of  the 
two  the  latter  is  the  better.  I  am  not  even 
aware  that  the  workers  have  been  able  to  agree 
upon  any  set  of  principles.  Their  words  are 
usually  half-baked,  over-reaching,  pontifical,  full- 
blown. The  best  service  their  words  have  done 
has  been  to  cloak  resolute  deeds. 

Chief  of  the  statements  they  have  made  for  their 


THE  OLD  THEATRE  AND  NEW     13 

work  has  been  the  so-called  sociological  argument. 
They  have  held  that  the  theatre  is  ill-adjusted  to 
the  society  that  feeds  it,  that  it  is  subversive  of 
popular  standards,  that  it  does  not  cultivate  the 
leisure  hour,  that  it  represents  only  certain  groups 
of  our  citizenship,  and  leaves  others  unsatisfied. 
And  they  call  for  a  theatre  to  serve  a  social  end,  to 
develop  local  spirit,  to  give  voice  to  unspoken 
needs,  to  fill  a  gap  in  a  line  of  institutions 
somewhere  with  the  church,  the  school  and  the 
jail. 

While  some  are  making  the  social  charges  others 
are  making  professional  charges  against  the 
theatre.  They  say  that  it  is  expensive  in  money 
and  life,  that  it  calls  for  much  and  gives  little  in 
return.  They  charge  that  it  is  banal,  that  it  has 
no  standards,  or  is  continually  debasing  its  stand- 
ards, that  to  the  artist  its  practice  is  precarious, 
and  too  often  cruel,  that  it  saps  the  springs  of 
originality  and  creative  effort  from  those  who 
work  within  its  walls.  Now  there  is  force  in 
both  of  these  arguments.  The  first  has  the 
warmth  of  a  social  cause.  The  second  the  impulse 
of  revolt.  And  yet  it  would  not  seem  that  either 
one  of  these  supplies  the  explanation  of  the  the- 
atrical activities  of  recent  years.  The  true  source 
lies  in  the  active  impulses  of  men.  The  logic  of 


14       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

events  is  better  to  be  believed  than  the  logic  of 
words. 

Taking  it  that  there  was  an  old  theatre  and  that 
there  is  a  struggle  for  a  new  theatre,  what  are  the 
marks  by  which  the  two  may  be  distinguished  from 
each  other*?  Are  there  any  precise  features  of  the 
old  theatre  for  which  the  new  theatre  has  under- 
taken to  supply  substitutes'?  Entirely  aside  from 
what  artists  say  about  the  matter  and  judging 
solely  from  events,  I  think  it  may  be  said  that  a 
study  of  recent  theatrical  activities  will  show  that 
there  are  such  features  and  I  am  going  to  try  to 
make  a  short  arbitrary  statement  of  what  I  think 
them  to  be. 

The  ideal  of  the  new  theatre  may  be  dis- 
tinguished from  that  of  the  old  by  their  differing 
standards  of  support.  Now  support  is  quite  in- 
dispensable in  the  theatre.  Unlike  the  other  arts, 
any  one  of  which  may  be  considered  quite  apart 
from  its  support,  and  simply  as  a  matter  of  the 
artist's  own  creative  impulse,  the  art  of  the  theatre 
has  no  existence  except  as  it  is  sustained  from 
without.  Support  is  not  the  reward  or  the  rec- 
ognition of  the  artist  of  the  theatre;  it  is  the 
prerequisite.  It  is  the  material  with  which  he 
works.  Without  it  he  cannot  work. 


THE  OLD  THEATRE  AND  NEW     15 

Now  support  is  of  two  orders,  clearly  to  be  dis- 
tinguished and  yet  mutually  connected.  The  first 
is  that  mental  support  upon  which  the  success  of 
every  play  depends,  the  support  of  the  minds  of 
the  audience.  The  second  is  the  financial  support 
upon  which  the  machinery  of  the  production  de- 
pends. Both  of  these  forms  of  support  must  be 
present  or  the  play  has  no  existence.  If  either 
one  of  these  is  withdrawn  the  play  suffers.  If 
either  one  is  vitiated  the  artist  suffers.  A  study 
of  the  condition  of  the  stage  during  several  years 
and  the  witness  of  the  activities  of  the  insurgent 
theatres,  lead  me  to  believe  that  in  neither  respect 
has  support  been  healthy  for  some  time  past.  I 
will  develop  this  point  under  Audience  and  Ex- 
pense. 

AUDIENCE.  The  audience  upon  which  any 
man  of  the  theatre  must  depend  for  support  of  his 
productions  is  incoherent,  inconsistent,  and  not  as 
yet  awakened  to  its  power  and  responsibilities. 
Studying  the  potential  audience  of  the  American 
theatre  we  find  that  it  falls  roughly  into  the  fol- 
lowing classes : 

Puritans.  To  these  the  theatre  is  still  forbid- 
den. Though  they  attend  it  they  look  upon  it 
with  suspicion.  Even  when  they  go  they  hold 
themselves  rigidly  and  take  no  real  pleasure  in  it. 


16       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

This  is  a  very  large  group  and  of  all  the  most  in- 
fluential. 

Theatre-Goers.  To  these  the  theatre  is  a  pas- 
time only,  and  all  theatres  are  in  one  class  whether 
legitimate,  motion-picture  or  vaudeville  theatre. 
Either  their  tastes  have  not  been  developed  or,  as 
is  more  likely,  they  check  their  taste  at  the  cloak- 
room when  they  go  to  the  theatre.  This  also  is  a 
large  class. 

Connoisseurs.  By  some  these  are  called  high- 
brows. They  have  become  so  critical  and  expert 
in  their  attitude  toward  a  play  as  to  be  of  little 
service  in  its  support.  This  is  a  small  but  trou- 
blesome group. 

Theatre-Lovers.  These  are  to  be  distinguished 
from  the  theatre-goers  because  they  have  taste, 
and  from  the  connoisseurs  because  they  go  to  the 
theatre  to  enjoy  it  and  not  to  judge  it.  This  class, 
which  is  very  small,  is  largely  made  up  of  for- 
eigners, Germans,  French,  and  Italians. 

To  these  general  classes,  with  their  widely  di- 
vergent attitudes  the  American  theatre  makes 
its  appeal.  Between  the  classes  there  is  mutual 
suspicion,  and  within  the  classes  there  is  incon- 
sistency and  insincerity.  No  effort  has  been  made 
to  specialize  in  the  appeal  to  any  one  of  the 
classes,  or  to  arouse  in  any  of  them  a  sense  of  re- 


THE  OLD  THEATRE  AND  NEW     17 

sponsibility  either  to  its  own  or  better  standards. 
The  theatre  has  attempted  as  a  rule  to  secure  the 
largest  number  out  of  the  total  membership  of  the 
classes.  Naturally  it  has  appealed  particularly  to 
the  largest  class,  to  those  to  whom  the  theatre  was 
a  pastime,  and  a  strenuous  effort  has  been  made 
by  subterfuges  and  otherwise  to  satisfy  the  rig- 
orous principles  of  the  Puritan  class.  If  any 
classes  were  to  be  offended  or  ignored  the  third 
and  fourth  classes  were  the  ones. 

EXPENSE.  The  necessity  of  reaching  these 
widely  divergent  groups  has  thrown  upon  the 
theatre  the  burden  of  great  expense.  It  has  pro- 
jected the  theatre  into  the  domain  of  big  business. 
No  more  could  a  theatre  that  appeals  to  all  the 
people  proceed  upon  a  small  plan  than  could  a 
department  store.  And  so  the  theatre  has  taken 
upon  itself  the  expenses  of  a  commercial  purveyor 
of  wares  to  a  large  and  widely  separated  patron- 
age. 

In  order  to  get  a  clear  understanding  of  the 
problem  of  expense  it  may  be  appropriate  to  out- 
line the  chief  factors  of  expense  in  a  production. 

RENT.  In  percentages  rent  runs  from  about 
one-third  of  the  total  income  of  a  production  in 
the  smaller  cities  to  one-half  of  its  income  in  New 
York  and  Chicago.  In  dollars  rent  in  the  latter 


i8       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

cities  is  based  upon  a  minimum  weekly  gross 
income  of  from  $5,000  to  $7,000.  If  the  gross 
income  is  not  as  much  as  this  the  company  is  dis- 
possessed. This  means  that  upon  the  percentage 
basis  every  production  must  pay  from  $2,500  to 
$3,000  weekly  rent  in  order  to  hold  a  theatre. 
These  figures  are  borne  out  by  the  flat  rental 
charged  for  the  average  New  York  theatre  which 
amounts  as  a  rule  to  $3,000  a  week.  The  lowest 
annual  rental  for  a  bare  theatre  building  in  New 
York  is  $32,000,  and  this  does  not  include  helpers 
or  heat  or  license.  The  highest  annual  rental  runs 
well  into  five  figures. 

BUSINESS  GETTING.  As  each  production  ap- 
peals to  the  entire  potential  patronage  of  the  city 
this  item  is  a  large  one.  Newspaper  advertising 
is  the  largest  single  detail.  With  paper,  sign 
boards  and  circulars  it  amounts  to  $1,000  a 
week. 

SALARIES.  It  is  noticed  that  almost  two-thirds 
of  the  weekly  income  is  accounted  for  before  any 
consideration  can  be  given  to  the  production. 
The  next  item  of  expense  is  salaries.  This  item 
can  be  set  down  as  averaging  $1,200  a  week. 
The  stage  crew  and  musicians  may  amount  to 
$  1 2  £  more. 

ROYALTY.     The  royalty  on  a  new  play  runs 


THE  OLD  THEATRE  AND  NEW     19 

from  five  to  ten  percent  on  the  gross,  or  a  mini- 
mum of  $300  a  week  on  a  play  that  can  run. 

PRODUCTION.  So  far  no  attention  has  been 
given  to  the  production  itself,  scenery,  rehearsal 
halls,  and  manager's  profits.  Adding  up  the  fig- 
ures given  we  have  $5,625  of  weekly  expenses 
before  the  production  can  be  paid  for.  Of  course 
no  estimate  can  be  made  of  the  cost  of  a  produc- 
tion but  $3,500  would  be  a  low  limit  of  cost  and 
the  high  limit  may  amount  to  as  much  as  the  man- 
ager is  able  to  pay.  And  no  consideration  is  given 
to  license  fees,  $500  in  New  York  and  $1,000  in 
Chicago,  for  these  ordinarily  come  in  rent,  nor  to 
travelling  expenses  of  companies  on  the  road  which 
are  made  up  by  shaving  the  metropolitan 
expenses  of  rent,  advertising  and  salaries. 

THESE  FIGURES  INTERPRETED.  Without  go- 
ing too  far  into  absolute  figures,  certain  conclu- 
sions are  forced  upon  one  in  studying  the  mechan- 
ics of  the  present-day  theatre.  If  a  production  is 
to  stay  alive  it  must  make  $7,000  a  week  or  more. 
Only  to  the  extent  that  it  makes  more  than  this 
amount  is  it  the  source  of  any  profit  to  its  man- 
agement. And  it  must  make  this  not  for  one 
week,  nor  for  ten,  but  for  a  season  or  a  series  of 
seasons  if  the  great  business  edifice  of  the  modern 
theatre  is  to  be  supported.  Translating  dollars 


20       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

into  audience  the  play  must  draw  at  least  nine 
thousand  people  a  week  for  an  indefinite  number 
of  weeks.  Manifestly  no  considerations  of  art 
or  idealism  will  affect  these  primary  necessities. 

Under  such  circumstances  no  one  can  wonder 
that  experiment  in  the  theatre  is  difficult  and  dan- 
gerous. Anyone  who  wishes  to  produce  plays  in 
America,  whether  he  belongs  to  the  most  strongly 
entrenched  groups  in  the  theatre  or  is  the  purest 
idealist  who  has  come  fresh  from  college  alike 
faces  these  conditions.  He  faces  an  audience  dis- 
organized, suspicious,  and  partly  insincere.  He 
faces  a  high  scale  of  expense  built  up  in  an  effort 
to  draw  and  hold  that  audience.  Can  one  be  sur- 
prised that  under  these  conditions  the  zest  of 
creative  work  in  the  theatre  has  been  almost 
smothered?  The  theatre  has  in  fact  become  a 
business,  but  a  business  based  upon  factors  no  one 
understands,  upon  which  no  one  can  depend,  in 
the  highest  degree  speculative.  Nothkig  is  more 
futile  than  to  blame  any  man  or  set  of  men  for 
these  conditions.  Before  he  does  so  let  the  critic 
declare  what  he  would  do  under  the  circumstances. 
The  answers  of  the  experimenter  have  been  illum- 
inating. Either  (l.)  he  has  accepted  the  condi- 
tions and  speculated,  as  does  the  established  man- 
ager but  without  the  latter's  acumen;  or  (2.)  he 


THE  OLD  THEATRE  AND  NEW     21 

appeals  for  support  to  a  narrow  audience  and 
fails,  swallowed  up  in  expense;  or  (3.)  he  calls 
for  a  subsidy  as  a  palliation  of  conditions;  or  (4.) 
he  starts  out  to  change  altogether  the  principles  of 
support  upon  which  the  theatre  is  run.  Of  them 
all  the  latter  offers  the  only  rational  programme. 
But  it  is  a  long  hard  road. 

More  various  than  the  minds  of  men  have 
been  the  different  purposes  of  those  who  have 
started  out  in  revolt  against  the  old  theatre. 
Sometimes  their  purposes  were  confused  between 
what  they  said  and  what  they  thought  secretly  in 
their  hearts.  Reduced  to  their  lowest  terms  these 
have  been  their  purposes : 

To  make  money. 

To  serve  society  by  giving  good  plays. 

To  serve  society  by  giving  plays  cheaply. 

To  teach  something. 

To  produce  plays  as  artistically  as  possible. 

Simply  to  do  something  in  the  theatre. 
Bo  has  the  confusion  in  the  situation  itself  been 
worse  confounded  by  the  confusion  in  the  minds 
of  those  who  would  correct  it. 

Quite  appropriately  the  first  signs  of  insurgency 
in  the  theatre  came  from  within  the  ranks  of  the 


22       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

profession,  from  those  actors  who  felt  the  new 
business  systems  coming  down  around  them  and 
sought  to  escape  their  hampering  control.  The 
impulse  that  controlled  this  early  insurgency  was 
that  most  healthy  impulse  on  the  part  of  the  artist 
to  use  his  powers  at  their  best  valuation,  contin- 
ually to  maintain  a  creative  interest  in  his  work, 
and  to  put  forth  his  own  vision  of  truth. 

To  this  impulse  we  owe  the  continuing  pro- 
duction on  the  stage  of  the  plays  of  Shakespeare 
and  the  courageous  efforts  that  have  been  made  to 
introduce  to  America  the  best  examples  of  the 
intellectual  drama  of  the  Continent.  Neither 
one  of  these  types  was  of  an  order  to  win  the 
largest  audiences.  Both  depended  upon  the  insist- 
ent purpose  of  the  artist  to  maintain  on  the  stage 
plays  that  were  fruitful  to  him  as  artist  at  what- 
ever expense  of  labor  or  decreased  returns.  The 
classical  play  had  so  much  of  sanction  on  its  side, 
it  was  so  harmonious  with  the  best  traditions  of 
the  theatre,  that  it  seems  strange  that  it  should  be 
classed  as  insurgent.  Yet  such  has  been  in  fact 
the  spirit  of  the  long  line  of  actors  who  for  thirty 
years  have  held  aloft  the  banner  of  Shakespeare. 

It  has  required  more  daring  to  take  up  the  cause 
of  the  modern  European  movement  in  drama. 
Without  a  large  popular  sanction,  resting  indeed 


THE  OLD  THEATRE  AND  NEW     23 

under  suspicion  and  distrust,  Ibsen  and  Shaw  and 
Hauptmann  have  offered  to  the  artists  simply  the 
opportunity  to  do  as  they  pleased  without  any 
other  compensation.  Few  indeed  have  come 
through  these  works  to  any  larger  power  with 
American  audiences.  Many  have  been  able  to 
make  success  only  by  drawing  upon  the  reserves  of 
popularity  stored  up  from  other  less  way-breaking 
efforts.  In  this  group  Mrs.  Fiske  stands  high. 
She  has  been  a  true  insurgent  within  the  profes- 
sion. And  so  in  varying  degrees  have  been  John 
Blair,  Mary  Shaw,  and  Arnold  Daly,  in  their 
insistence  on  doing  as  they  pleased  and  not  boring 
themselves  in  a  theatre  that  put  a  heavy  price  on 
such  privileges. 

While  the  established  theatre  of  America  was 
giving  its  anxious  friends  a  hard  nut  to  crack  other 
theatres  were  prospering  that  were  run  on  alto- 
gether a  different  system.  Some  of  these  were  in 
the  old  world,  but  some,  strange  to  say,  were  in 
America.  Set  away  in  side  streets,  making  no 
appeal  to  the  many,  playing  the  classics  of  many 
languages  and  the  newer  pieces  as  well,  these  thea- 
tres were  serving  their  audiences  and  giving  joy 
to  their  workers.  As  a  rule  they  belonged  to  those 
racial  pockets  which  are  so  common  in  the  cosmo- 


24        THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

politan  life  of  great  centers.  The  Irish,  German, 
Yiddish,  Bohemian,  and  French  theatres  were  not 
perfect  but  they  did  show  how  other  nations  can 
support  a  vital  dramatic  art  with  critical  under- 
standing and  financial  support.  The  time  was 
coming  when  they  would  serve  as  models  for  thea- 
tres dealing  with  the  American  substance  of  life. 
But  before  that  time  came  great  sums  of  money 
were  to  be  spent  in  bolstering  up  a  system  that 
was  doomed. 


II 

EXPERIMENTS  IN  SUBSIDY 

WHEN  men  first  began  to  think  of  the  prob- 
lems of  support  in  the  theatre  they  thought  of  them 
only  in  terms  of  expense  and  ignored  the  factor 
of  mental  support.  This  was  the  time  in  which 
subsidy  was  looked  upon  as  a  cure-all  for  .the  ills 
of  the  theatre.  The  idea  of  a  subsidy  as  a  sum 
of  money  laid  aside  for  the  support  or  guarantee 
of  a  theatrical  venture  is  one  of  the  oldest  and 
commonest  of  ideas  in  theatrical  reform.  The 
idea  is  derived  from  a  misunderstanding  of  the 
practice  and  history  of  the  state  theatres  of  the 
Continent  and  is  strengthened  by  the  American's 
faith  in  the  power  of  money  to  accomplish 
miracles. 

Now  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  the  subsidy  sys- 
tem of  itself  is  not  successful,  that  while  it  is  use- 
ful in  pointing  the  way  it  has  never  yet  succeeded 
in  reaching  the  goal.  It  has  failed  because  it  has 
depended  upon  the  power  of  money  to  do  what 
needed  to  be  done  by  other  means,  because  it  is 

25 


26       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

palliative  rather  than  fundamental  in  its  efforts, 
because  it  has  served  to  perpetuate  a  system  that 
was  subversive  and  expensive  and  because  it  has 
tried  to  impose  upon  theatre-goers  under  the  guise 
of  art  and  at  the  appeal  of  duty  a  kind  of  play 
they  did  not  want  and  would  not  accept. 

All  of  these  go  back  to  the  first,  that  the  subsidy 
system  continues  in  the  theatre  the  money  impulse 
and  the  money  control.  So  far  from  money  being 
all  powerful  to  solve  the  problems  of  the  theatre 
it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  dependence  on  money  is 
the  first  guarantee  of  failure.  In  practice  subsidy 
always  goes  on  the  theory  that  the  ills  of  the  thea- 
tre, ills  largely  derived  from  the  false  standards  of 
values,  can  be  cured  by  continuing  those  values. 
It  may  be  true  that  the  cure  of  the  ills  of  democ- 
racy is  more  than  democracy.  But  the  cure  of  the 
ills  of  money  is  less  money.  The  subsidy  system 
in  the  theatre  is  inconsistent  and  palliative. 

The  classic  example  of  the  failure  of  the  subsidy 
system  in  America  is  the  New  Theatre  in  New 
York,  an  example  so  full  of  lessons  as  to  have  been 
worth  the  money  it  cost.  The  incorporators  un- 
dertook this  project  with  an  absolute  faith  in  the 
power  of  money  to  do  everything  they  bid.  And 
they  determined  that  there  should  be  money 
enough.  Kings  of  the  business  world  themselves, 


EXPERIMENTS  IN  SUBSIDY        27 

they  could  not  conceive  that  there  was  any 
demesne  that  would  fail  to  serve  them.  So  they 
fell  into  a  series  of  errors.  The  first  was  the  idea 
that  in  building  a  building  you  are  erecting  an 
institution,  that  you  can  create  a  theatre  as  you 
create  a  sales  organization.  The  New  Theatre 
came  into  existence  as  a  gilded  frame  for  a  picture 
that  had  not  yet  been  painted  by  an  artist  who 
had  not  yet  been  born. 

A  fallacy  allied  to  this  is  the  idea  that  you  can 
hold  the  artist  to  a  schedule,  that  you  can  force 
the  processes  of  the  theatre  to  suit  the  terms  of  a 
contract.  System  has  become  very  powerful  in 
the  theatre  but  it  alone  could  not  buy  the  services 
of  playwrights,  even  the  most  mercenary ;  it  could 
not  create  out  of  hand  an  audience;  it  could  not 
force  the  completion  of  a  building  and  the  prepa- 
ration of  a  play  that  the  opening  performance 
might  be  given  on  schedule  time,  nor  overcome  the 
handicap  caused  by  a  false  and  precipitate  start ;  it 
could  not  adapt  a  great  hall  to  the  requirements  of 
the  contemporary  play ;  it  could  not  overcome  the 
disadvantages  of  a  scale  of  high  prices  and  the 
tone  of  social  exclusiveness  placed  about  the  thea- 
tre; it  could  not  allay  the  suspicions  of  the  experts 
in  the  theatre.  Like  the  middleman  in  Frank 
Norris's  novel  who  was  smothered  in  the  wheat  he 


28       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

had   made   his   master,    the   New   Theatre    was 
engulfed  in  "business  principles." 

The  New  Theatre  used  its  subsidy  to  perpetu- 
ate the  faults  of  the  commercial  theatre.  True, 
it  introduced  repertory,  it  eliminated  stars,  it 
produced  new  plays.  But  in  so  far  as  the  Ameri- 
can theatre  is  the  victim  of  overfeeding  it  magni- 
fied the  disease  and  offered  no  cure.  It  accepted 
all  the  faults  of  the  commercial  theatre,  the  high 
salaries,  the  tremendous  property  investments,  and 
tried  to  cure  them  by  superfluity.  One  purpose 
the  New  Theatre  served  well.  It  showed  that  no 
amount  of  money  can  accomplish  what  must  come 
in  the  form  of  a  change  of  impulse,  that  the  stim- 
ulus of  investment  must  give  away  to  the  stimu- 
lus of  creation,  that  reform  will  not  come  from 
overplus  but  from  reduction  to  the  necessary  fac- 
tors. Much  of  the  vogue  of  the  simpler  methods 
of  production,  the  smaller  and  more  modest  prin- 
ciples of  staging  and  popular  appeal,  followed 
immediately  upon  the  failure  of  the  New  Thea- 
tre. 

After  this  first  expensive  venture  there  was  no 
further  attempt  to  solve  the  problem  of  the  thea- 
tre by  erecting  a  building.  Another  and  far  bet- 
ter idea  than  this  is  the  subsidizing  of  the  idea,  the 
providing  of  a  fund  of  money  for  the  support  of 


EXPERIMENTS  IN  SUBSIDY        29 

a  series  of  productions.  Two  undertakings  work- 
ing upon  this  plan  are  found  in  Chicago. 

For  these  two  Chicago  ventures  two  different 
forces  are  responsible.  The  first  is  the  character 
and  situation  of  the  city  itself.  The  second  city 
of  the  country  in  size  Chicago  is  theatrically  only 
a  provincial  city.  Few  productions  outside  of  the 
vaudeville  field  are  made  there.  For  its  best 
theatrical  fare  the  city  is  as  much  dependent  upon 
New  York  as  are  Memphis  and  Madison.  Now, 
there  is  in  Chicago  a  strong  creative  spirit  not 
only  in  business  but  in  art  and  civic  affairs  as  well. 
It  is  to  be  supposed  that  such  a  city  would  not  long 
be  content  to  leave  unused  its  own  inventive  im- 
pulses in  the  theatre.  The  conditions  that  have 
made  Chicago  secondary  in  the  field  of  the  com- 
mercial theatre  have  made  her  a  pioneer  in  the 
movement  for  a  local  theatre. 

The  first  step  for  a  new  theatre  in  Chicago  was 
taken  in  1906  when  a  group  of  public  spirited  men 
and  women  organized  the  New  Theatre  of  Chi- 
cago. Twenty  trustees  were  elected  and  a  guar- 
antee fund  of  $25,000  was  raised.  Mr.  Victor 
Mapes  was  called  from  the  east  to  take  charge  of 
the  undertaking.  Of  course  it  is  easy  enough  after 
ten  years  to  pick  flaws  in  this  early  venture.  The 
repertory  gives  a  patch-work  appearance ;  only  one 


30       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

American  play  of  any  value  was  produced,  James 
A.  Herne's  "Margaret  Fleming" ;  in  foreign  plays 
the  committee  was  misled  into  offering  a  prepond- 
erance of  the  strong  meat  from  European  tables  to 
the  tender  palates  of  the  American  middle- west; 
the  audience  was  not  successfully  recruited;  there 
were  evidences  of  managerial  vagueness  of  pur- 
pose; the  venture  broke  up  in  a  division  of  coun- 
cils and  a  loss  of  the  guarantee.  All  these  diffi- 
culties could  be  shown  without  proving  anything 
at  all.  Probably  under  no  circumstances  at  all  at 
this  period  could  the  theatre  have  been  longer 
lived.  Nothing  daunted  a  few  years  later  Chi- 
cago came  forward  with  another  plan.  And  as 
she  had  led  New  York  both  in  time  and  in  the 
character  of  her  first,  in  her  second  she  took  a  long 
stride  ahead  of  anything  that  had  been  done. 

The  second  Chicago  venture  goes  back  to  the 
fact  that  Chicago  had  as  one  of  her  citizens  one 
of  the  most  dynamic  figures  in  the  modern  move- 
ment of  the  stage.  I  will  tell  more  of  Donald 
Robertson  when  I  come  to  discuss  his  early  work 
in  "Breaking  a  New  Furrow."  It  is  enough  to 
say  that  this  early  work  was  Robertson's  real  con- 
tribution to  the  American  stage,  a  contribution 
that  is  not  as  yet  enough  appreciated,  for  which 
perhaps  the  time  has  not  yet  come  to  speak  in  ade- 


EXPERIMENTS  IN  SUBSIDY        31 

quate  terms.  This  work  had  been  done  in  and 
near  Chicago  and  had  planted  the  city  with  new 
seeds  of  growth. 

Here  comes  a  feature  of  the  story  somewhat 
pathetic  and  altogether  significant.  Robertson's 
efforts  before  had  been  artistic  and  scholarly.  He 
had  gathered  about  himself  an  unselfish  company. 
He  had  introduced  new  plays  and  had  started  a 
circuit.  As  far  as  possible  he  had  worked  with 
an  eye  single  to  the  true  glories  of  the  theatre, 
without  impeding  paraphernalia  and  without  con- 
fusion of  principles.  He  had  paid  a  heavy  price 
in  money  and  strength.  But  he  had  been  repaid 
in  the  artist's  only  coin,  freedom  for  his  own  ar- 
tistic impulses  and  growing  solidity  and  expert- 
ness  in  his  group. 

And  then  came  the  ambition  to  do  the  big  thing. 
I  do  not  know  whence  it  arose.  Probably  it  was 
born  in  many  minds  at  once,  to  those  of  civic  vi- 
sion in  Chicago  meaning  an  opportunity  to  estab- 
lish a  great  institution,  to  the  artist  himself  per- 
haps an  opportunity  to  escape  from  the  weariness 
of  his  self-appointed  task.  When  such  an  ambi- 
tion comes  the  first  thing  thought  of  is  money; 
next  to  that  the  need  of  an  edifice  flanking  the 
other  respectable  edifices  of  the  city,  with  flat 
imperturbable  facade,  windows  with  blinds  dis- 


32       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

erectly  drawn,  and  invisible  but  intimate  sources 
of  connection  with  centres  of  power  in  the  Great 
City  by  the  Sea. 

This  was  in  1911;  a  fund  was  raised;  com- 
mittees were  established.  The  organization  was 
to  be  bi-cameral,  the  Chicago  Theatre  Society  rep- 
resenting the  city,  the  Drama  Players  being  the 
expert  and  producing  group  and  representing  the 
profession.  I  haven't  the  heart  to  tell  the  whole 
story,  and  perhaps  it  isn't  necessary.  Again  there 
came  the  medley  of  many  purposes,  the  dividing  of 
councils.  As  long  as  a  man  was  searching  his 
way  on  a  shoe-string  he  had  obligation  only  to  his 
own  and  his  company's  dinner  and  to  the  word  of 
command.  But  when  there  were  a  hundred  sub- 
scribers his  obligations  were  multiplied  a  hundred 
fold.  Where  does  the  point  of  conscience  divide 
between  the  artist's  instinctive  imperatives  and  all 
those  dictates  that  come  so  well  recommended  from 
the  policies  of  "good  business  practice"1?  Cer- 
tainly a  large  venture  was  compelled  to  do  some 
things  a  smaller  venture  needed  not  to  do.  A  big 
institution  had  obligations  to  the  theatre  as  a 
whole  that  smaller  institutions  did  not  have. 
Professional  actors  were  necessary.  A  road  tour 
was  considered  desirable.  The  repertory  had  to 
be  selected  by  an  efficient  system.  An  organiza- 


EXPERIMENTS  IN  SUBSIDY        33 

tion  that  depended  upon  the  largess  of  givers 
could  not  select  plays  as  did  Garrick  and  Mac- 
ready  and  Frohman.  Plays  must  be  selected 
after  the  fashion  used  in  locating  a  cigar  store,  by 
a  referendum  to  experts  and  a  counting  of  the 
passers-by. 

The  effort  was  high  minded  enough  but  it  was 
doomed  to  failure.  No  power  on  earth  could 
save  it.  The  company  accepted  all  the  disadvan- 
tages of  the  commercial  system  with  none  of  its 
advantages.  Not  only  had  it  all  the  expense  of 
professional  companies  but  more.  The  actors  and 
the  management  were  all  expensive.  And  the 
system  of  administration  ignored  by  principle  all 
the  means  by  which  a  commercial  company  builds 
up  its  returns  by  a  slow  accretion  of  interest  and 
a  gradual  expansion  of  profits  over  weeks  and 
months. 

The  chief  results  can  be  given  in  a  few  words. 
By  the  aid  of  a  committee  a  repertory  was  gathered 
together  of  which  the  individual  numbers  were 
good  and  the  group  bad.  The  repertory  as  a 
whole  had  a  singular  intensity  and  purposefulness, 
hardly  relieved  by  the  one  or  two  pieces  of  his- 
torical (and  therefore  academic)  comedy  included. 
Though  care  was  taken  to  encourage  American 
playwrights  no  excellent  native  plays  were  secured. 


34       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Without  exception  the  dramatists  thought  that 
what  was  expected  of  them  was  something  "dar- 
ing" and  "strong"  particularly  in  matters  of  sex. 
The  company  was  like  the  repertory,  excellent  in 
members,  quite  without  mass  or  group  effective- 
ness. The  whole  thing  lacked  the  genius  of  the 
leader  to  fuse  elements  into  a  whole.  An  inspir- 
ing leader  through  the  wilderness  Robertson  lost 
his  sceptre  when  he  reached  the  temple.  Above 
all  the  audience  was  lacking.  People  could  not  be 
lured  to  come.  And  the  fact  that  some  benevo- 
lent people  had  spent  $60,000  did  not  serve  at  all 
beside  the  fact  that  men  and  women  did  not  sup- 
port the  theatre  with  their  minds. 

The  subsequent  history  of  the  Chicago  Theatre 
Society  can  be  told  in  a  few  words.  Though  they 
had  learned  an  expensive  lesson  the  leaders  did 
not  entirely  despair  of  making  money  serviceable 
to  the  new  drama.  Robertson  withdrew  but  those 
who  were  left  turned  their  attention  to  the  sup- 
port of  little  companies  that  here  and  there  were 
starting  up  with  scant  money  but  big  enthusiasm. 
Men's  minds  go  by  contraries.  It  was  not  with- 
out reason  that  Winthrop  Ames  flew  from  the 
vasty  deeps  of  the  New  Theatre  to  the  petite 
spaces  of  his  Little  Theatre,  or  that  the  Chicago 
Theatre  Society  turned  from  their  expensive 


EXPERIMENTS  IN  SUBSIDY        35 

experiment  in  theatre  reform  to  the  poorly  staged, 
frugal,  but  imaginative  productions  of  the  Irish 
Theatre.  The  Chicago  people  still  had  a  little 
theatre,  The  Fine  Arts,  and  they  had  some  money. 
It  must  suddenly  have  come  to  them  that  there 
was  one  thing  they  did  not  have  and  had  not  en- 
couraged, and  that  was  the  service  of  a  band  of 
artists.  For  two  years  the  Chicago  Theatre  So- 
ciety supported  such  artists  as  they  could  find, 
doing  real  service  in  bringing  the  Irish  Players  and 
Miss  Horniman's  company  to  this  country.  They 
ended  their  existence  with  another  venture  in  the 
subsidizing  of  an  imported  English  stock  com- 
pany, playing  English  plays  under  the  direction  of 
B.  Iden  Payne.  This  venture  cost  $15,000  and 
resulted  in  some  good  productions,  and  the  first 
timid  awakenings  to  life  of  a  new  audience.  But 
imported  plants  do  not  grow  in  American  soil. 

The  truth  of  this  was  shown  in  New  York  a 
few  years  later  when  in  January,  1915,  Emanuel 
Reicher  established  his  Modem  Stage.  Reicher 
came  to  America  with  the  prestige  of  a  great  name 
in  Germany.  He  was  equipped  by  association 
with  both  the  Berlin  Deutsches  Theater  and 
the  Volkstheater.  He  had  been  admired  by 
Ibsen.  Early  in  the  century  he  had  directed  John 
Blair  and  Mary  Shaw  in  their  performance  of 


36       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

"Ghosts."  Moreover  he  had  behind  him  a  group 
of  people  to  whom  the  theatre  is  not  a  mystery, 
who  are  in  the  habit  of  supporting  it  as  a  public 
institution,  as  they  have  done  the  Irving  Place 
(New  York)  and  the  Pabst  Theatre  (Milwaukee) 
stock  companies. 

But  all  these  things  were  extraneous  to  the  real 
needs  for  the  establishment  of  an  American  thea- 
tre. In  the  making  of  a  repertory  Reicher  was 
conscious  only  of  the  principles  followed  on  the 
Continent.  From  the  start  there  was  a  flavor  of 
class  consciousness  about  the  Modern  Stage  that 
Reicher  himself  may  not  have  intended.  Prob- 
ably New  York  has  seen  no  more  distinguished 
productions  than  two  of  those  presented  by 
Reicher.  But  it  remains  that  in  serving  "Elga" 
and  "Rosmersholm,"  "When  the  Young  Vine 
Blooms"  and  "The  Weavers"  he  was  providing 
alien  fare.  And  when  he  joined  himself  with 
The  People's  Theatre  and  The  Wage  Earners' 
Theatre  he  completed  his  alienation  from  the 
American  audience. 

Many  times  throughout  this  book  I  will  have 
occasion  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  small 
American  cities  are  to  be  considered  by  themselves 
in  any  view  of  the  American  theatre.  A  large 


EXPERIMENTS  IN  SUBSIDY        37 

part  of  what  is  called  the  modem  theatre  move- 
ment is  a  product  of  the  small  towns.  Their 
problem  is  both  identical  with  that  of  the  metropo- 
lis and  distinct  from  it.  They  are  dependent 
upon  New  York  for  their  theatrical  fare.  But 
gradually  their  condition  has  been  growing  more 
desperate.  Their  productions  have  been  taken 
away  from  them  and  cheaper  ones  have  been  sub- 
stituted until  to-day  the  motion  picture  and  the 
cheap  repertory  company  constitute  their  only  en- 
tertainment in  the  theatre. 

With  them  it  is  therefore  not  a  case  of  improv- 
ing theatrical  fare  to  the  point  of  the  absolutely 
good.  It  is  a  question  of  providing  for  the  town 
even  the  average  fare  that  the  city  lives  on,  the 
popular  successes,  the  ordinary  good  shows  of  the 
cities.  One  can  imagine  the  town  man  saying, 
"Well  enough  for  art,  if  you  will  only  give  us 
wholesome  entertainment.  We  do  not  ask  for 
Dunsany  and  Maeterlinck,  but  we  would  like  to 
exchange  our  cheap  movie,  our  travelling  burlesque 
show,  for  Tt  Pays  to  Advertise'  or  'Get-Rich- 
Quick  Wallingford.'  " 

For  a  question  of  this  kind  the  answer  has 
usually  been  sought  in  the  local  stock  company. 
Under  stress  of  a  great  many  attacks  the  stock 
company  has  suffered  a  great  deal  of  late.  To-day 


38       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

there  are  very  few  towns  of  below  fifty  thousand 
inhabitants  that  can  support  a  stock  company. 
These  circumstances  opened  another  avenue  for 
experiment  in  the  subsidizing  of  a  theatre.  It 
would  be  presumed  that  if  subsidy  is  ever  to  suc- 
ceed it  must  be  here.  But  such  experience  as  there 
has  been  only  goes  further  to  show  how  useless, 
unaided  financial  support  is  when  the  mental  sup- 
port of  the  audience  is  not  satisfactory. 

Within  the  last  five  years  three  towns  in  New 
England  have  undertaken  to  support  their  local 
stock  companies.  The  Portland  Stock  Company 
lasted  twelve  weeks ;  the  Pittsfield  Theatre  lasted 
about  a  year;  the  Northampton  Theatre  has  run 
through  five  seasons.  The  latter  two  are  worthy 
of  some  attention. 

In  1911  fifty  citizens  of  Pittsfield,  Massachu- 
setts, a  city  of  about  30,000  inhabitants,  pur- 
chased the  Colonial  Theatre  of  that  city  with  the 
hope  of  making  it  as  creditable  to  the  city  as 
the  library  and  museum.  After  conference  with 
expert  advisers  the  theatre  was  offered  to  William 
Parke  on  what  seemed  to  be  very  advantageous 
terms.  Parke  was  something  more  than  the  ordi- 
nary stock  manager.  He  had  had  experience  with 
the  Castle  Square  Theatre  in  Boston.  He  was  an 
artist,  was  interested  in  the  best  things,  and  a 


39 

genius  in  the  economies  of  production.  He  gath- 
ered together  a  company  of  minimum  size,  from 
twelve  to  fourteen  people,  and  paid  them  con- 
servatively, based  upon  the  fact  that  he  was  offer- 
ing a  full  season's  contract.  By  strict  attention 
to  details  he  reduced  his  expenses,  including  sal- 
aries, royalties,  and  rent,  to  below  $1,500  a  week. 
The  company  opened  May  20,  1912,  played 
through  that  summer  and  the  following  winter, 
and  closed  July  12,  1913.  The  plays  produced 
included  current  Broadway  successes,  regular  stock 
pieces,  classic  pieces  including  Shakespeare,  and 
pieces  from  the  new  intellectual  drama,  in  about 
equal  ratio.  Parke  was  supported  by  concessions 
in  the  price  of  the  theatre  and  by  organized  sup- 
port in  attendance.  At  the  end  of  a  year  he  gave 
up  the  task  several  thousand  dollars  poorer. 

In  a  venture  of  this  kind  there  are  always  some 
features  upon  which  no  decision  can  be  made. 
One  of  these  has  to  do  with  the  scale  of  prices. 
In  a  desire  to  serve  the  greatest  number  Parke  set 
his  prices  at  ten,  twenty-five,  and  fifty  cents. 
Whether  he  would  have  prospered  better  at  higher 
prices  is  a  bootless  question.  The  other  question 
pertains  to  the  repertory.  No  one  can  tell  that 
any  other  selection  of  plays  would  have  been  bet- 
ter received.  It  is  very  improbable. 


40       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Aside  from  these  dubious  points  some  things 
are  clear.  There  was  not  in  the  city  a  coherent 
audience  for  any  one  of  the  classes  of  plays  offered 
or  for  all  combined.  The  audience  was  split  by 
its  demand  to  laugh,  to  cry,  to  think,  as  all 
audiences  are.  Moreover  it  was  drawn  here  and 
there  by  other  forms  of  entertainment,  by  visiting 
companies,  motion  picture  shows  and  other  stock 
companies.  The  conclusion  is  that  either  the 
already  low  expenses  had  to  be  reduced  or  the 
guarantee  fund  had  so  to  be  raised  as  to  amount 
to  an  annual  benefaction.  The  former  of  these 
things  could  not  possibly  be  done  under  the  com- 
mercial system  of  the  theatre.  Even  if  the  latter 
had  been  possible  it  would  not  have  been  judicious 
to  support  by  benefaction  a  thing  the  people  had 
showed  they  did  not  want.  The  decision  to  close 
was  inevitable. 

A  situation  somewhat  of  the  same  type  is  pre- 
sented by  the  so-called  municipal  theatre  at 
Northampton,  Massachusetts.  In  many  respects 
this  is  one  of  the  most  extraordinary  experiments 
of  recent  years,  not,  let  me  hasten  to  say,  through 
anything  that  has  been  done  as  a  "municipal" 
theatre,  or  in  the  production  of  a  better  art  of  the 
theatre,  but  solely  as  a  contribution  to  the  prob- 
lem of  the  theatre  in  the  small  town. 


EXPERIMENTS  IN  SUBSIDY        41 

Northampton  is  about  two-thirds  the  size  of 
Pittsfield  and  its  population  is  a  little  more  diver- 
sified through  the  fact  that  it  is  a  manufacturing 
town  and  an  educational  center  as  well.  In  1892 
Mr.  Edward  H.  R.  Lyman  gave  to  the  town  of 
Northampton  a  large  and  well  equipped  theatre 
called  The  Academy  of  Music  to  be  held  by  the 
municipality  and  conducted  for  the  welfare  of  its 
citizens.  For  twenty  years  nothing  was  done  to 
put  the  spirit  of  this  gift  into  effect.  Then  in 
1912  a  campaign  was  started,  supporting  com- 
mittees were  organized,  experts  were  interrogated 
and  as  a  result  Miss  Jessie  Bonstelle  and  Mr.  Ber- 
tram Harrison  were  engaged  to  form  a  stock  com- 
pany. 

Both  the  directors  were  professional  managers 
of  broad  experience  and  excellent  judgment. 
What  financial  arrangements  were  made  I  do  not 
know.  The  theatre  was  given  under  a  certain 
concession  and  arrangements  were  made  for  a 
guarantee  fund  against  loss.  The  principles  kept 
in  mind  in  making  out  the  programme  were  that  as 
far  as  possible  the  selection  should  be  made  to 
please  the  town.  The  theatre  was  to  be  a  munic- 
ipal theatre.  No  surrender  was  to  be  made  to  the 
desire  to  do  the  esoteric  thing;  on  the  other  hand 
no  plays  of  a  debased  order  were  to  be  considered. 


42       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

In  deference  to  the  civic  nature  of  the  enterprise 
the  prices  were  set  at  twenty-five,  fifty,  and  sev- 
enty-five cents. 

Considering  the  purposes  a  truly  remarkable  set 
of  activities  was  placed  in  motion.  The  plays 
were  of  the  general  type  represented  by  the  Pitts- 
field  list, — Broadway  plays,  stock  plays,  classical 
plays,  and  new  intellectual  drama.  Both  the 
first  and  second  seasons  drew  upon  the  guaran- 
tees, $6000  and  $2000  respectively.  The  play- 
ers ended  the  third  season  $3000  to  the  good. 
The  fourth  season  also  was  a  success,  with  an 
average  weekly  attendance  of  3681.  Many  times 
during  the  five  seasons  there  had  been  crises  but 
these  had  always  been  met  by  vigorous  public  ap- 
peals on  the  part  of  the  directors.  On  the  face  of 
the  returns  it  would  seem  that  this  theatre  had 
been  a  success.  But  the  end  of  the  fifth  season 
brought  the  withdrawal  of  the  professional  direct- 
ors. The  theatre  still  stands  a  question  mark 
before  the  future. 

Let  me  say  once  for  all  that  no  one  could  have 
done  better  than  the  management  of  the  North- 
ampton company  has  done.  The  plays  have  been 
good.  The  acting  has  been  excellent.  The  com- 
pany has  been  well  supported  by  a  courageous  and 
intelligent  committee.  The  trouble  goes  back  to 


EXPERIMENTS  IN  SUBSIDY        43 

the  audience.  The  Northampton  audience  is  not 
only  split  into  the  four  divisions  mentioned  in  my 
last  chapter,  but  by  racial  and  social  subdivisions 
as  well.  The  audience  of  school-girls  from  Smith 
College,  by  no  means  an  uplift  audience,  the  audi- 
ence of  the  Puritans  who  are  shown  into  their  seats 
as  into  a  pew,  the  audience  of  the  French-Cana- 
dian workers  from  the  mills  coalesce  with  diffi- 
culty if  at  all.  This  is  not  only  a  local  situation. 
It  is  the  situation  everywhere  but  Northampton 
provides  a  good  text.  There  are  enough  people 
in  Northampton  to  support  a  theatre  if  all  would 
look  one  way.  But  they  are  not  even  all  willing 
to  sit  together.  It  is  said  that  the  company  was 
severely  censured  for  playing  such  an  immoral 
play  as  Besier's  "Don!"  No  wonder  Miss  Bon- 
stelle  became  discouraged. 

Until  you  have  an  audience  that  faces  one 
way  no  expensive  machinery  of  the  theatre  can 
succeed  except  the  one  that  appeals  to  the  largest 
number.  The  thing  to  do  is  to  start  measures  to 
face  the  audience  as  one,  and  until  this  is  accom- 
plished to  reduce  the  expenses  of  experiment  to  the 
very  lowest  figures. 


Ill 

THE  FEDERATED  AUDIENCE 

WHEN  I  say  that  the  subsidy  system  is  a  failure 
I  naturally  do  not  mean  that  the  theatre  can  run 
without  money  or  that  there  would  be  any  case  in 
which  generous  financial  assistance  would  not  be 
useful.  I  mean  only  that  money  is  not  the  first 
and  decisive  need,  that  before  money  can  be  of 
any  use  at  all  there  must  be  an  audience  that  will 
support  the  theatre  with  its  intelligence. 

It  did  not  take  long  to  discover  this  need. 
Soon  after  the  subsidy  system  had  shown  its  weak 
spots  measures  were  taken  to  organize  the  audi- 
ence. It  is  a  strange  commentary  on  the  persist- 
ency of  ideas  that  the  first  efforts  of  the  organized 
audiences  were  toward  the  support  of  the  estab- 
lished institution  of  the  theatre.  Like  subsidy, 
the  federated  audience  was  projected  for  pallia- 
tion rather  than  cure. 

A  few  years  ago  an  enterprising  writer  on  the 
theatre  made  connection  between  his  subject  and 
Tarde's  theories  of  mob  psychology.  It  was  an 

44 


THE  FEDERATED  AUDIENCE   45 

ingenious  idea,  more  serviceable  in  adorning  a  dis- 
cursive hour  than  in  pointing  a  serious  argument. 
And  yet  when  the  American  audience  began  to 
take  seriously  its  part  in  the  "two  hours'  traffic  of 
the  stage"  a  real  advance  had  been  made.  Until 
recently  writers  had  been  content  to  refer  to  any- 
thing other  than  the  consumer  when  it  came  to 
pointing  the  errors  of  the  stage.  The  player,  the 
playwright,  the  producer,  were  all  at  fault.  The 
law  of  supply  and  demand,  so  useful  elsewhere, 
was  not  held  to  be  in  force  in  the  theatre. 

But  there  has  been  a  change  in  all  that.  Partly 
as  a  result  of  new  theories  of  social  psychology, 
partly  on  account  of  lessons  learned  from  the  early 
experiments  in  a  reformed  stage  it  was  seen  that 
the  audience  had  even  a  governing  place  in  the 
fortunes  of  any  theatrical  undertaking. 

Then  came  the  movements  for  the  enlistment  of 
the  consumer  in  the  cause  of  a  better  drama,  for 
his  organization  into  a  compact  unit  which  could 
be  wielded  for  a  specific  purpose.  When  one 
starts  upon  measures  of  reform  the  first  instrument 
usually  employed  is  prohibition.  In  the  last  few 
years  there  have  been  several  measures  for  the 
expression  of  the  power  of  the  audience  through 
organized  prohibition.  Perhaps  the  most  vigor- 
ous effort  of  this  type  was  that  of  the  American 


46       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Federation  of  Catholic  Societies,  which  in  1915 
signed  a  manifesto  against  immoral  and  demoral- 
izing plays.  Aside  from  the  fact  that  this  kind  of 
reform  is  merely  repressive  it  fails  of  its  stated 
purpose.  For  by  selecting  for  particular  atten- 
tion certain  productions  these  are  given  a  noto- 
riety that  is  very  effective  in  getting  business. 

Far  more  rational  than  the  scheme  of  index 
expurgatorius  is  that  of  collective  support  of  plays 
that  are  considered  worthy.  This  plan  empha- 
sizes the  responsibility  of  the  audience  toward 
worthy  undertakings,  it  compels  their  active  dis- 
crimination as  between  good  and  bad  plays,  and  it 
draws  together  those  of  like  minds  on  matters  of 
the  art  of  the  stage.  One  of  the  first  movers  in 
the  federation  of  the  audience  for  the  positive  sup- 
port of  good  plays  was  the  MacDowell  Club  of 
New  York  City,  which  has  for  some  years  scrutin- 
ized through  committees  the  plays  to  be  supported 
by  its  membership.  It  was  soon  followed  by  the 
Drama  League  of  America,  founded  in  Evanston, 
Illinois,  in  1910,  and  immediately  taking  its  placd 
as  the  strongest  movement  toward  the  federation! 
of  the  audience. 

The  idea  of  federation  as  practiced  by  thd 
Drama  League  depended  upon  certain  principles^ 
In  theory  it  was  a  positive  idea  and  not  negative^ 


THE  FEDERATED  AUDIENCE      47 

constructive  and  not  destructive.  It  went  on  the 
idea  that  the  present  organization  of  the  theatre 
should  be  supported,  that  the  real  hope  of  the 
future  lies  in  the  fostering  of  the  best  agencies  in 
the  professional  theatre.  The  Drama  League  has 
maintained  this  attitude  always.  It  has  been  per- 
sistent in  the  support  of  the  established  theatre 
and  has  done  little  or  nothing  for  those  enterprises 
which  have  started  up  outside  the  theatre. 

Now  there  are  certain  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
a  proper  administration  of  the  federation  of  the 
audience  for  the  support  of  good  plays.  One  of 
these  grows  out  of  the  fact  that  almost  all  plays 
are  produced  first  in  New  York.  The  Drama 
League  had  its  headquarters  near  Chicago,  and  the 
people  it  was  particularly  designed  to  reach  were 
people  of  the  smaller  centres  of  the  country. 
With  them  it  was  not  a  case  of  choice  of  plays.  It 
was  a  case  of  take  what  they  could  get  and  be 
thankful.  It  is  apparent  that  an  organization 
founded  to  serve  the  nation  as  a  whole  could  not 
have  the  immediate  encouraging  effect  upon  the 
fortunes  of  a  play  that  an  organization  working 
i  alone  in  New  York  might  have.  For  if  a  good 
iplay  needs  support  it  needs  this  in  the  first  half 
dozen  weeks  of  its  career  in  New  York.  If  it 
does  not  receive  support  then  it  will  not  live  for 


48       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

the  smaller  cities.  The  fact  that  it  lives  without 
organized  support  argues  this  a  superfluity. 

There  are  also  some  difficulties  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  judgment  as  to  the  merits  of  plays. 
If  this  judgment  is  to  be  of  any  use  it  must  be  im- 
mediate and  it  must  be  expert.  For  these  reasons 
there  is  nothing  else  to  do  but  to  delegate  the 
selection  to  committees.  Now  the  delegation  of 
this  responsibility  is  open  to  grave  disadvantages. 
I  am  not  willing  to  grant  that  any  committee  has 
the  judgment  to  say  what  plays  should  be  sup- 
ported. If  anyone  were  able  to  say  what  play  is 
good  and  what  play  is  bad  the  problem  of  the 
manager  in  the  selection  of  plays  would  be  for- 
ever solved.  In  fact  no  one  can  select.  It  is  a 
part  of  the  streng-jh  of  the  theatre  that  it  lies  so 
much  in  the  question  zones.  By  what  tenets  shall 
one  decide  what  play  to  approve*?  By  the  tenets 
of  things  past*?  Then  is  experiment  unduly 
handicapped.  Or  by  the  tenets  of  novelty*? 
Then  must  all  tradition  and  law  be  given  up.  It 
is  clear  that  there  are  no  absolute  tenets  for  selec- 
tion. The  effort  to  select  escapes  being  destruct- 
ive and  arbitrary  only  by  being  futile. 

As  there  could  not  be  an  agreement  on  what 
constitutes  a  good  play  the  attempts  to  agree  only 
made  the  confusion  worse.  It  provided  false 


THE  FEDERATED  AUDIENCE      49 

standards  where  before  there  were  none.  Some 
thought  a  play  should  be  well-made ;  others  that  it 
should  be  uplifting  in  tendency.  Some  would 
bar  too  great  frankness  in  the  treatment  of  prob- 
lems but  would  admit  just  enough  frankness. 
Few  found  any  room  for  the  way-breaking  and 
renovating  types.  Then  there  was  the  difficulty 
that  a  play  may  be  both  good  and  bad  at  the  same 
time.  It  may  be  good  in  construction  as  a  play, 
bad  in  its  morals  and  superb  in  its  acting.  Or  it 
may  be  bad  in  its  acting  and  unquestioned  in  its 
morals. 

This  point  aside  for  a  moment  there  are  some 
other  disadvantages.  The  most  important  of 
these  is  that  by  the  Playgoing-Committee-Bulle- 
tin  system  the  basis  of  discrimination  was  special- 
ized in  the  hands  of  a  few.  From  the  many  there 
was  removed  the  necessity  of  inquiry  as  to  the 
merits  of  a  play.  It  is  true  the  forms  of  the  bul- 
letins attempted  to  palliate  this  by  giving  the 
reasons  for  the  choices  but  the  fact  remains  that 
the  process  was  taken  from  the  many  and  given  to 
the  few.  The  real  value  of  any  judgment  in  art 
as  well  as  morals  lies  in  the  power  of  discrimina- 
tion. By  the  system  followed  this  judgment  was 
made  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  discrimination  on 
the  part  of  the  many  impossible. 


50       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

In  isolating  and  calling  together  the  audience 
the  Drama  League  did  an  excellent  thing.  It 
made  the  audience  conscious  of  its  power  and  of 
its  responsibilities,  and  it  started  in  motion  a  reno- 
vating stream  of  activity  and  discussion.  But 
the  Drama  League  accomplished  more  for  the 
theatre  in  its  study  classes,  lectures,  discussions, 
and  conventions  than  in  all  its  bulletins  for  the 
reason  that  in  the  former  it  made  the  audience 
alert.  It  encouraged  inquiry  and  discussion. 
To  the  extent  that  the  Drama  League  limited 
itself  to  the  problems  of  the  audience  it  has  done 
well.  It  has  fastened  responsibility  where  it  be- 
longs. 

Like  the  Drama  League  the  Drama  Society  of 
New  York  started  out  to  support  the  best  things 
in  the  established  theatre.  It  began  on  the  theory 
that  the  best  things  find  their  way  to  the  stage  in 
able  productions.  And  so  instead  of  trying  to 
organize  an  artistic  theatre  it  tried  to  organize  an 
art-loving  public.  To  this  end  it  evolved  a 
scheme  somewhat  more  definite  than  that  of  the 
Drama  League.  Instead  of  bulletining  a  play 
and  leaving  it  to  the  good  will  of  the  member  to 
support  the  choice  it  organized  a  small  and  com- 
pact audience  which  engaged  itself  to  support  the 
best  plays  in  New  York  City.  Out  of  twelve 


THE  FEDERATED  AUDIENCE   51 

plays  selected  by  the  executive  committee  each 
member  agreed  to  take  tickets  to  ten.  During 
the  three  years  that  this  plan  was  followed,  from 
1913  to  1916,  the  attendance  of  the  membership 
at  plays  ranged  from  five  hundred  to  nine  hun- 
dred. 

Certain  advantages  are  found  in  this  plan. 
The  first  of  these  is  that  support  was  supplied 
very  near  the  source.  The  second  was  that  the 
organization  had  a  real  contract  with  the  mem- 
bership whereby  attendance  upon  the  selected 
plays  could  be  guaranteed.  And  obviating  some 
of  the  disadvantages  of  the  delegation  of  choice, 
present  here  as  well  as  in  the  plan  of  the  Drama 
League,  the  Drama  Society  worked  out  a  system 
by  which  the  judgment  of  the  play-going  com- 
mittee could  be  checked  up  with  that  of  the  mem- 
bers. 

But  with  all  of  the  advantages  of  the  scheme 
the  disadvantages  were  so  many  and  the  opportun- 
ities of  more  direct  work  were  so  pressing  that  in 
the  fourth  season  of  the  Drama  Society's  work  the 
system  of  federated  support  upon  commercial 
productions  was  finally  given  up.  It  must  have 
come  to  the  minds  of  the  directors  that  however 
far  they  went  in  supporting  the  established  thea- 
tre they  were  but  throwing  pebbles  in  the  sea. 


52       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Meanwhile  other  tasks  were  waiting  to  be  done 
which  the  commercial  theatre  with  all  their  assist- 
ance could  not  undertake.  So  in  1916  the  di- 
rectors decided  to  use  the  force  of  the  federated 
audience  for  the  attack  upon  some  fundamental 
problems.  These  problems  were  of  two  types, 
(i.)  the  production  and  support  of  a  Shakespear- 
ian play  rendered  under  new  and  peculiarly  artistic 
principles,  by  methods  which  drew  upon  scholar- 
ship and  artistry  and  the  best  traditions  of  the  pro- 
fessions, and  (2.)  the  support  of  a  plan  by  which 
good  productions  could  be  offered  to  those  who 
desired  them  at  a  fee  as  low  as  ten  cents.  To 
this  end  efforts  have  been  made  to  interest  the 
Board  of  Education  and  to  develop  a  People's 
Theatre.  It  is  clear  that  in  these  two  fields  lie 
great  opportunities  for  the  federation  of  the  au- 
dience. Much  may  come  from  an  impulse  derived 
from  an  audience  wisely  directed.  Nothing  will 
come  from  the  mere  impulse  of  money,  as  witness 
recent  ten  thousand  dollar  prizes,  and  the  trips 
made  by  emissaries  of  the  New  Theatre  to  the 
homes  of  great  dramatists,  prizes  and  trips  that 
led  to  nothing  and  worse  than  nothing. 

A  figure  who  has  long  been  on  the  minds  of 
writers  on  the  American  stage  has  been  the  unpro- 


THE  FEDERATED  AUDIENCE   53 

duced  American  playwright.  He  has  floated 
before  the  vision  of  the  organizers  of  the  New 
Theatres  of  Chicago  and  New  York,  of  the  Chi- 
cago Theatre  Society  and  of  many  another  ven- 
ture, but  he  had  not  yet  revealed  himself. 
Whether  it  was  that  the  unproduced  playwright 
was  but  a  child  of  the  imagination  or  was  unpro- 
duced because  he  had  not  yet  been  warmed  into 
life  did  not  immediately  appear.  The  fact  is  that 
we  probably  need  waste  no  sympathy  on  the  un- 
produced playwright.  The  true  playwright  will 
manage  to  get  himself  produced  in  one  way  or 
another. 

Two  New  York  organizations  have  been  estab- 
lished for  the  particular  purpose  of  encouraging 
this  gentleman  by  supplying  him  with  a  small  but 
generous  minded  audience.  The  New  York  Stage 
Society  was  established  in  1912  on  the  model  of 
the  London  Stage  Society,  an  organization  which 
had  been  uncommercial,  innovating  and  sane  and 
had  used  the  force  of  an  audience  since  1899  for 
the  support  of  some  scores  of  good  plays.  Upon 
this  model  the  New  York  Stage  Society  started  in 
to  support  an  American  drama.  There  were 
among  its  membership  300  players,  playwrights 
and  members  of  the  world  of  fashion.  Fees  were 
$20  a  year. 


54       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

At  the  beginning  the  Stage  Society  determined 
to  produce  absolutely  good  foreign  plays  and  to 
keep  watch  for  good  plays  by  American  play- 
wrights. It  had  on  its  board  many  men  and 
women  from  professional  ranks  and  its  associa- 
tions were  with  the  commercial  theatre.  Its 
plays  have  been  done  almost  entirely  under  pro- 
fessional direction  and  in  regular  theatres.  Scen- 
ery has  been  borrowed  from  Broadway  managers. 
Little  effect  has  been  made  to  introduce  new  sys- 
tems of  production.  With  all  respect  for  the  high 
principles  of  the  Society  it  is  chiefly  remembered 
for  the  mischances  of  its  early  sallies  with  the  law 
in  connection  with  Sunday  performances.  The 
Stage  Society  presented  some  distinguished  plays, 
among  them  being  Masefield's  "The  Tragedy  of 
Nan,"  and  Bennett's  "The  Honeymoon."  In  the 
search  for  American  plays  the  Society  was  not  suc- 
cessful, the  only  plays  of  distinction  of  native  au- 
thorship being  Patterson's  "By-Products"  and 
Torrence's  "Granny  Maumee." 

The  best  work  of  the  Stage  Society  was  done  in 
the  two  years  of  the  presidency  of  Mrs.  Emilie 
Hapgood.  She  vigorously  pushed  the  work  of 
the  Society  out  of  the  narrowly  professional  scope 
that  it  had  followed  into  broader  and  more  funda- 
mental fields.  In  the  season  of  1914-1915  steps 


THE  FEDERATED  AUDIENCE      55 

were  taken  for  raising  a  fund  for  bringing  to 
America  Gordon  Craig,  Max  Reinhardt  and 
Granville  Barker.  Reinhardt  was  stopped  by 
the  blockade,  the  Society  found  it  impossible  to 
raise  the  $100,000  that  Craig  demanded,  but 
Barker  came.  The  sum  of  $30,000  was  provided 
for  him  and  there  followed  the  Wallack  Theatre 
venture  in  "A  Midsummer  Night's  Dream," 
"The  Man  Who  Married  a  Dumb  Wife,"  and 
"Androcles  and  the  Lion." 

This  engagement  was  noteworthy  for  another 
contribution  that  was  made  through  Mrs.  Hap- 
good  as  president  of  the  Stage  Society.  In  1914 
Mr.  Sam  Hume  had  been  showing  in  Cambridge 
a  set  of  model  stages.  Mrs.  Hapgood  heard  of 
these  and  made  arrangements  to  take  them  to  New 
York.  There  followed  the  Exhibition  of  the  Arts 
of  the  Theatre  at  714  Fifth  Avenue  to  which  must 
be  referred  most  of  our  knowledge  of  recent  move- 
ments in  stage  decoration.  Represented  in  this 
Exhibition  were  the  first  samples  of  the  work  of 
Mr.  R.  E.  Jones.  Since  Mrs.  Hapgood's  resig- 
nation the  best  work  of  the  Society  has  been  done 
in  support  of  the  Provincetown  Players. 

Another  society  which  attempted  to  use  the 
power  of  the  organized  audience  for  the  support 
of  American  plays  was  the  National  Federation 


56 

of  Theatre  Clubs,  organized  in  1912  out  of  clubs 
belonging  to  the  New  York  City  Federation  of 
Women's  Clubs.  This  federation  under  the  pres- 
idency of  Sydney.  Rosenfeld  reached  a  member- 
ship of  1300  and  had  produced  several  plays  with- 
out discovering  anything  worth  while  before  it 
went  to  pieces  of  its  own  weight. 

The  organization  of  the  audience  represents  a 
great  advance  toward  a  solution  of  the  problems 
of  the  theatre.  Beginning  as  a  repressive  tning  it 
then  became  constructive  and  cooperative.  It 
bent  its  first  energies  to  the  support  of  the  estab- 
lished theatre.  But  the  time  was  at  hand  when 
the  audience  was  to  find  itself  engaging  in  more 
interesting  adventures  still,  making  itself  a  work- 
ing part  of  new  movements  for  the  complete  re- 
construction of  the  American  theatre. 


IV 
BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW 

WE  have  only  lately  discovered  that  the  theatre 
is  not  a  place  of  mystery,  that  it  is  indeed  a  place 
that  should  be  clearly  understood  by  everyone. 
The  time  in  which  the  theatre  throve  in  the 
ignorance  of  its  patrons  was  followed  by  the  time 
when  its  only  hope  lay  in  the  knowledge  of  its 
patrons.  At  first  there  was  a  little  hesitancy  on 
the  part  of  managers  to  admit  the  people  into 
the  sacred  precincts.  They  still  tried  to  maintain 
the  ancient  puzzle  values  of  their  art,  to  convince 
the  world  that  gold  could  be  made  from  brass. 
It  was  under  these  circumstances  that  the  world 
decided  to  write  plays  and  the  world's  wife  went 
on  the  stage. 

Suddenly,  to  paraphrase  WTiistler,  there  was 
much  talk  "about  it  and  about"  and  the  theatre 
was  abroad  in  the  land.  From  the  pursuit  of 
social  causes,  of  child  labor,  of  alleys  and  garbage 
cans,  men  turned  to  the  stage.  From  the  problem 
of  the  full  hour  they  turned  to  the  problem  of 

57 


58       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

the  leisure  hour,  from  the  problems  of  work  they 
turned  to  the  problems  of  play.  It  was  the  Rus- 
kin  and  Morris  propaganda  over  again  applied 
not  to  objects  of  utility  but  to  objects  of  pleasure. 
Like  furniture,  and  wall  paper,  and  town  halls 
the  theatre  belongs  to  all  the  people.  It  is  every 
man's  province.  It  is  the  one  art  in  which  the 
criteria  of  the  expert  avail  not  at  all  if  the  ordi- 
nary man's  "rule  of  thumb"  is  not  satisfied.  A 
generation  ago  Matthew  Arnold  had  raised  the 
cry,  "Organize  the  theatre."  He  had  been  fol- 
lowed by  Jones  and  Archer  in  England  and  an 
American  choir  took  up  the  chorus,  "The  theatre 
must  be  saved  for  democracy."  A  scant  five  years 
ago  the  social  significance  of  the  drama  was  hailed 
as  of  moment  to  the  state.  Sociologists,  social 
engineers,  educators  pounced  upon  it  as  a  long 
neglected  but  useful  instrument.  That  all  this  is 
a  very  recent  growth  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  up 
until  1914  such  a  periodical  as  The  Survey  had 
no  room  for  references  to  the  theatre.  The 
American  City  did  not  begin  to  notice  theatres 
until  about  1915.  A  work  which  marked  an 
epoch  in  the  social  interest  in  the  theatre  is  "The 
Exploitation  of  Pleasure,  a  Study  of  the  Com- 
mercial Recreations  in  New  York  City"  by 
Michael  M.  Davis,  published  in  1911  by  the 


BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW       59 

Sage  Foundation.  Leagues  arose,  and  support 
and  subscription  societies;  education  swung  into 
line,  campaigns  and  propaganda  ensued.  We 
have  told  of  some  of  the  efforts  to  save  the  theatre 
by  money  and  by  referendum.  Now  come  the 
efforts  to  save  it  by  exhortation  and  revival. 

And  then  begins  the  era  of  experiments. 
Placed  as  a  rule  in  fields  innocent  of  any  asso- 
ciation with  the  theatre,  impelled  by  great  aims, 
handicapped  by  the  lack  of  tools  and  of  expert 
knowledge,  keyed  only  to  more  feverish  activity 
by  the  magnitude  and  complexity  of  the  task  that 
faced  them,  blind  to  the  enormity  of  their  claims, 
these  young  organizations  started  out  to  break  the 
furrow  in  untilled  soil.  Perhaps  there  is  little 
to  be  said  for  many  of  these  early  efforts  except 
that  they  undertook  in  the  spirit  of  eagerness  and 
youth  tasks  that  only  these  spirits  would  venture 
upon.  And  in  the  general  fanfare  they  did  leave 
room  in  which  the  artist,  no  propagandist  as  a 
rule,  could  cultivate  his  gifts. 

Early  in  the  century  the  influence  of  the  in- 
dependent theatre  movements  of  Europe  began 
to  filter  into  the  United  States.  We  too  had  had 
our  Theatre  of  Arts  and  Letters  as  far  back  as 
1892  but  this  had  been  too  much  committeed 
and  had  come  to  nothing.  The  experiments  of 


60       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Antoine,  of  the  German  Freie  Biihne,  of  the  Lon- 
don Independent  Theatre,  meant  little  to  America. 
But  the  Irish  Theatre  seized  our  imagination. 
Yeats's  visit  to  America  in  1903—4  had  been  a 
triumphal  tour,  and  had  been  followed  by  a  call 
for  an  American  branch  of  the  Irish  Theatre. 
America  began  to  apply  the  principles  of  this 
theatre  to  herself.  Then  in  1911  the  Irish  Play- 
ers themselves  came,  covering  the  country  in  their 
tour,  and  spreading  the  ideal  of  naturalness  and 
simplicity.  The  company  came  again  the  follow- 
ing year,  playing  during  the  two  seasons  in  a 
repertory  of  a  score  of  new  Irish  plays.  After 
them  the  Horniman  company  came  from  Man- 
chester in  1913.  Organized  on  a  different  plan, 
far  more  expert,  more  connected  with  the  tradi- 
tion of  the  theatre,  an  organization  of  the  town 
whereas  the  Irish  Theatre  had  been  an  organiza- 
tion of  the  countryside,  their  influence  was  no  less 
strong. 

Meanwhile  spontaneous  movements  had  been 
starting  up  in  America,  They  were  of  all  kinds 
and  they  made  all  kinds  of  blunders.  Begin- 
ning to  show  themselves  about  1910  some  disap- 
peared immediately.  Others  more  hardy  or  more 
adaptable  still  continue.  Among  the  early  ef- 
forts some  stand  out  for  particular  attention  on 


BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW       61 

account  of  the  character  of  their  antecedents  or 
of  their  professions.  In  the  nineties  there  had 
been  established  in  the  Hull  House  Settlement 
in  Chicago  a  dramatic  club.  This  had  gone  on 
for  some  years  simply  as  an  amateur  organization. 
Then  about  1907  it  began  to  do  work  of  a  more 
serious  and  significant  kind.  Under  the  direc- 
tion of  Laura  Dainty  Pelham  it  began  to  produce 
plays  of  the  new  European  movement.  For  this 
purpose  it  was  well  equipped.  Its  players  were 
recruited  from  those  races  which  are  more  at  home 
in  the  theatre  than  are  our  people.  The  audiences 
too  were  alert  and  ready.  The  players  had  a 
theatre  of  their  own.  Soon  they  developed  a 
command  of  the  technic  of  the  theatre.  The 
spirit  in  which  they  did  their  work  and  the  excel- 
lent plays  they  produced  attracted  attention  to 
this  group  as  the  first  "new"  theatre  company  in 
America. 

Naturally  enough  many  of  the  early  compa- 
nies in  the  country  were  directly  modelled  after 
the  free  theatres  of  the  Continent.  It  was  not 
always  recognized  when  men  spoke  of  "free" 
theatres  that  there  was  no  need  to  free  the  theatres 
in  this  country  in  the  way  in  which  they  were  do- 
ing this  in  Germany.  While  in  Germany  the 
freeing  of  the  theatre  may  mean  the  placing  of 


62       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

it  in  the  hands  of  the  people,  in  this  country  the 
freeing. of  the  theatres  would  rather  mean  re- 
moving it  from  the  hands  of  the  majority.  This 
Julius  Hopp,  one  of  the  first  if  not  the  first  of 
agitators  for  a  free  theatre  in  America,  did  not 
recognize.  As  early  as  1905  Hopp  had  organ- 
ized in  New  York  City  a  Progressive  Stage  So- 
ciety for  the  presentation  of  radical  plays.  One 
cannot  decide  which  was  the  stronger  in  Hopp, 
the  passion  for  the  theatre  or  the  passion  for  so- 
cial reform.  We  find  him  continually  confus- 
ing the  two,  now  using  the  theatre  as  a  means 
of  disseminating  radical  ideas,  now  organizing 
progressive  societies  for  the  support  of  new  plays. 
Hopp  belongs  to  the  school  of  those  who  would 
impose  on  the  theatre  of  America  the  systems  of 
the  Continent.  After  the  organization  of  the 
Progressive  Stage  Society  he  busied  himself  in  a 
series  of  subterranean  measures  for  theatre  re- 
form, until  in  1911  he  comes  forward  again  with 
a  scheme  for  the  solution  of  the  problems  of 
democracy  and  the  stage.  A  great  believer  in 
the  power  of  the  people,  the  organization  of 
human  thunderbolts  is  Hopp's  ideal  of  salvation. 
Just  what  cause  the  organization  of  the  people 
would  serve  in  the  theatre  he  has  not  showed.  In 
fact  the  theatre  is  dull  with  the  people's  dullness 


BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW       63 

and  crass  with  their  lack  of  vision.  If  there  is 
anything  in  the  world  it  needs  it  is  to 'be  freed 
from  the  control  of  the  man  on  the  street.  If 
there  is  any  call  for  a  class  contest  in  America  in 
things  of  the  theatre  it  is  for  a  class  contest  in  art 
in  which  the  "good  enough"  of  the  average  man 
goes  down  to  defeat  before  the  "best"  of  the  art- 
ist. 

But  Hopp  organized  the  Progressive  Stage  So- 
ciety, the  Wage  Earners'  Theatre,  the  Educational 
Theatre  for  Schools,  the  Theatre  League,  and  he 
had  a  hand  in  Reicher's  The  Modern  Stage,  in 
each  appealing  to  the  people  as  to  a  great  be- 
leaguered mass  to  solidify  their  interest  in  sup- 
port of  radical  plays.  In  none  of  these  did  he 
succeed  and  it  is  safe  to  say  the  class  theatre  will 
not  succeed  in  America.  And  yet  often  though 
Hopp  has  failed  he  would  be  a  rash  judge  who 
would  say  that  Julius  Hopp  had  not  made  his 
mark  in  the  American  theatre.  Before  anyone 
else  he  had  seen  that  the  present  system  of  organ- 
ization of  the  theatre  is  wrong  and  had  started 
out  to  reconstruct  that  system. 

Of  another  order  and  by  some  believed  to  be 
the  most  dynamic  force  applied  to  the  creation  of 
a  new  ideal  in  the  American  theatre  is  the  career 
and  work  of  Donald  Robertson.  Only  incident- 


64       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

ally  a  social  worker,  caring  nothing  for  the  im- 
plications of  the  theatre  with  other  forms  of  life 
except  as  the  needs  of  the  theatre  compel  him  to 
take  his  message  to  the  people,  Donald  Robertson 
is  an  idealist  and  a  poet  in  the  theatre.  I  have 
spoken  of  him  already  in  connection  with  his 
Drama  Players  of  the  Chicago  Theatre  Society. 
The  true  man  stands  behind  the  work  of  that  or- 
ganization in  the  work  he  did  in  preparing  for  it. 
He  was  reared  in  the  best  schools  of  English  act- 
ing. Coming  to  America  he  served  as  support  for 
some  of  the  best  American  stars  of  the  last  genera- 
tion. Then  settling  in  Chicago  he  began  to  pre- 
pare the  way  for  pioneer  work  in  the  theatre.  His 
ideals  have  been  truly  reconstructive  and  truly 
scholarly.  For  inspiration  he  goes  back  without 
apology  to  Aristophanes  and  Plautus,  to  Moliere 
and  Shakespeare.  And  he  holds  rigorously  to  the 
ancient  and  honorable  traditions  of  the  stage. 

In  opening  his  programme  Robertson  undertook 
the  herculean  task  of  creating  both  players  and 
audience.  For  the  former  he  wanted  men  and 
women  of  flexibility  and  rich  imagination  and 
experience.  For  the  latter  he  wanted  an  audience 
which  could  support  what  he  offered  in  plays  and 
playing.  He  began  by  creating  a  dramatic 
school.  Here  he  gathered  around  him  a  group 


BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW       65 

of  players  who  were  soon  fired  with  his  own  vision. 
Then  in  the  summer  of  1907  the  time  came  for 
the  next  step.  Robertson  organized  a  repertory 
company  and  engaged  the  Ravinia  Theatre,  a 
theatre  in  an  outlying  summer  park.  There  he 
produced  five  plays,  Moliere's  "The  Miser,"  Pail- 
leron's  "The  Triumph  of  Youth,"  Ibsen's  "Ros- 
mersholm,"  Hauptmann's  "The  Coming  of 
Peace,"  and  Browning's  "A  Blot  on  the 
'Scutcheon."  This  offering  of  plays,  so  stimulat- 
ing and  yet  so  substantial,  won  immediate  ap- 
proval from  critics  and  audiences.  As  the  sum- 
mer passed  there  came  a  demand  for  a  continua- 
tion of  the  work  in  a  theatre  in  the  city.  With  a 
little  assistance  Robertson  took  the  Garrick  for 
matinees,  the  Hull  House  Theatre  for  irregular 
night  performances,  and  finally  the  theatre  that 
was  to  house  so  many  Chicago  experiments,  the 
Music  Hall,  later  the  Fine  Arts  Theatre  and  now 
The  Playhouse. 

I  should  be  glad  to  dwell  upon  the  achieve- 
ments of  this  first  year,  lived  through  under  fear- 
ful odds,  a  new  play  to  be  rehearsed  every  week, 
Robertson  himself  playing  in  many  plays,  making 
up  deficits,  working  with  committees,  conducting 
rehearsals,  blowing  the  fire  of  enthusiasm  into 
tired  followers.  Seventeen  plays  were  done  this 


66       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

first  season  and  it  was  by  all  odds  the  best  reper- 
tory that  has  been  put  forth  by  an  American 
theatre.  Between  Chicago  engagements  Robert- 
son and  his  company  were  travelling  about  the 
country,  in  Iowa,  Illinois  and  Wisconsin,  putting 
into  effect  new  ideas  of  support  and  of  circuit. 

In  1908  they  opened  again  for  a  summer  sea- 
son at  Ravinia  Park,  this  time  in  Milton's 
"Comus."  After  a  successful  season  more  sub- 
stantial financial  support  was  secured  and  Robert- 
son was  invited  by  the  Trustees  of  the  Art  In- 
stitute to  appear  in  the  theatre  of  this  institution. 
This  move  was  significant  from  two  points  of 
view.  It  was  the  first  case  in  this  country  of  the 
recognition  of  the  drama  as  a  sister  art  by  an 
Art  Institute.  The  association  of  drama,  the  poor 
drab  of  the  arts,  with  her  more  pampered  sisters 
has  been  in  many  respects  fortunate  for  the 
theatre.  But  it  was  not  the  good  fortune  that  was 
first  manifest  to  the  band  under  Donald  Robert- 
son. To  them  the  confused  situation  of  ticket- 
selling  in  such  a  sacred  hall  was  a  sordid  but  dis- 
tressing fact.  This  season  spelled  the  beginning 
of  the  breaking  of  the  back  of  the  enterprise.  No 
one  is  qualified  to  speak  for  Robertson  in  this,  but 
as  an  outside  observer  I  should  say  that  even  his 
broad  devoted  shoulders  were  not  strong  enough 


BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW       67 

to  bear  the  weight  of  the  conditions  that  were 
laid  upon  him  during  the  two  following  seasons. 
What  were  the  conditions  that  bowed  him  down? 
The  lack  of  a  theatre;  defections  from  his  com- 
pany; the  lack  of  a  settled  company  and  so  the 
impossibility  of  keeping  plays  in  repertory;  the 
attempt  to  produce  too  many  new  plays;  a  little 
strain  of  the  academic  and  far-fetched  in  the 
choices  for  the  second  season;  the  lack,  on  the 
part  of  subscribers,  of  a  comprehension  of  what 
was  being  undertaken,  with  some  consequent 
alienation;  some  disastrous  experiments  with  un- 
successful American  plays;  the  lack  of  enough 
capital  to  tide  over  bad  times. 

The  enterprise  lasted  three  years  and  then  be- 
gan preparations  for  the  larger  and  less  success- 
ful venture  of  the  Drama  Players.  During  three 
years  32  plays  had  been  given  in  Chicago  and 
on  tour,  and  one  of  the  most  strenuous  efforts 
for  a  new  American  theatre  had  made  a  place  for 
itself  in  history. 

The  early  enterprises  came  to  an  end  literally 
because  the  machinery  was  not  ready  to  carry 
them.  Theatres  could  not  be  had  or  they  were 
too  expensive.  There  were  not  enough  people 
to  supply  understanding  audiences.  Actors  had 
to  be  paid,  they  were  inflexible  in  the  handling  of 


68       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

the  plays,  and  they  were  fickle.  Worst  of  all  the 
"idea"  by  which  the  machinery  might  be  created 
had  not  yet  gained  currency.  It  was  still  con- 
sidered vaporing  and  folly. 

The  serious  importance  of  this  lack  of  machin- 
ery must  have  become  apparent  to  many  people 
at  the  same  time.  Undoubtedly  it  was  brought 
home  to  a  great  many  by  the  experiences  of 
Robertson.  It  was  apparent  that  if  such  under- 
takings as  this  were  to  succeed  the  ground  would 
have  to  be  carefully  prepared  for  them.  If  possi- 
ble established  institutions  might  be  used  as  the 
units  for  providing  this  machinery.  If  necessary 
the  machinery  would  have  to  be  built,  but  how- 
ever it  was  to  be  secured  it  must  come  and  come 
speedily.  This  demand  explains  the  formation  at 
about  the  same  time  of  several  institutions  that 
set  themselves  to  the  preparing  of  the  minds  of 
the  audience,  to  the  building  of  machinery  for 
the  critical  dissemination  of  information  on  the 
theatre  and  of  knowledge  of  the  new  movements. 

Of  these  movements  some  took  a  local  and  in- 
tensive place  but  one  became  very  early  of  na- 
tional scope.  I  have  already  studied  one  aspect 
of  the  work  of  the  Drama  League  of  America. 
Outside  of  the  bulletining  of  plays  its  work  was 
so  various  that  the  term  Drama  League  has  be- 


BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW       69 

come  synonymous  with  all  the  present  activities 
in  the  new  theatre.  The  Drama  League  has  been 
the  publicity  committee  of  the  whole  movement, 
managing  to  keep  the  theatre  always  in  the  pub- 
lic eye  and  always  on  the  public  tongue.  In 
this  country  we  have  become  very  fond  of  founda- 
tions, bureaus  and  boards  of  public  service.  The 
purpose  of  these  may  be  executive,  but  it  is  quite 
likely  to  be  investigative  or  merely  conversa- 
tional. They  arise  out  of  a  desire  to  learn,  to 
classify,  and  to  discuss.  The  passion  of  knowl- 
edge, for  its  organization,  cataloguing,  and  diffu- 
sion as  small  talk,  is  very  characteristically  Ameri- 
can. 

It  was  for  some  such  function  as  this  that  the 
Drama  League  seems  to  have  been  established. 
It  was  a  league  of  those  interested  in  the  theatre 
and  concerned  in  its  improvement.  Not  in  the 
least  a  band  of  experts  it  has  been  admittedly  a 
gathering  of  theatre-goers  interested  in  the  con- 
sideration of  the  theatre  from  the  standpoint  of 
consumers.  This  programme  cannot  be  despised 
if  it  is  followed  consistently  and  is  clearly  under- 
stood. As  long  as  the  Drama  League  has  con- 
tinued an  organization  of  talk,  of  the  exchange 
and  distribution  of  views,  it  has  served  its  pur- 
pose excellently.  When  it  tried  to  treat  concrete 


70       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

problems  and  provide  specific  solutions  it  was  un- 
successful. Of  the  activities  of  the  Drama 
League  the  following  may  be  mentioned :  the  sup- 
port of  professional  plays;  the  publication  of 
plays;  the  encouragement  of  local  responsibility 
toward  the  theatre;  the  distribution  of  informa- 
tion on  matters  of  the  theatre;  the  support  of 
periodical  publications  on  theatre  matters.  Of 
these  the  first  two  have  been  failures;  the  next 
two  have  been  really  successful.  The  last  has 
been  successful  so  far  as  it  serves  the  purpose  of 
discussion,  unsuccessful  so  far  as  it  presumes  to 
represent  authority. 

An  organization  that  undertook  to  develop  in 
a  local  way  a  better  understanding  of  the  problems 
of  the  theatre  was  the  Wisconsin  Dramatic  So- 
ciety established  in  Wisconsin  in  1910.  Admit- 
tedly local  in  character  and  specific  in  aims  the 
Wisconsin  Dramatic  Society  continued  its  work 
for  four  years  and  ceased  its  endeavors  when  the 
preliminary  work  for  which  it  was  established  had 
been  sufficiently  done.  Its  methods  and  princi- 
ples may  be  developed  in  a  few  words.  The  Wis- 
consin Dramatic  Society  associated  itself  at  the 
outset  with  an  institution  of  education.  While 
it  was  an  independent  organization  with  a  mem- 
bership drawn  from  all  parts  of  the  state  it  drew 


BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW       71 

force  from  the  rather  coherent  social  conscious- 
ness that  surrounded  the  University  of  Wiscon- 
sin. The  Society  began  with  the  purpose  not  only 
to  attack  some  of  the  problems  of  the  theatre,  but 
to  attack  as  well  the  conditions  upon  which  the 
theatre  is  supported  in  the  minds  of  the  people. 
For  this  reason  the  educational  work  of  the  So- 
ciety was  stressed  through  the  formal  encourage- 
ment of  the  reading  of  printed  plays  and  through 
the  emphasis  upon  lectures  on  topics  of  the  new 
theatre.  In  January,  1911  a  company  was  es- 
tablished in  Madison  for  the  presentation  of  plays 
of  merit  "which  for  one  reason  or  another  are 
not  available  on  the  professional  stage."  The 
company  in  Madison  was  followed  by  a  company 
in  Milwaukee,  and  for  some  years  these  two  com- 
panies presented  plays  in  their  respective  cities, 
exchanged  plays,  and  presented  them  in  neigh- 
boring cities.  During  the  last  two  years  of  the 
life  of  the  Society,  1913-1915,  some  work  was 
done  in  the  fostering  of  a  Wisconsin  drama  by 
the  composition  and  the  publication  of  plays, 
and  by  the  publication  of  a  magazine.  The  work 
which  was  carried  on  for  four  years  by  the  devo- 
tion of  a  group  of  workers  representing  many  of 
the  activities  of  the  state  came  to  an  end  in  1915. 
The  Wisconsin  Workshop  in  Milwaukee  is  an 


72       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

outgrowth  of  the  Milwaukee  department  of  this 
Society. 

Emphasizing  more  the  sociological  features  of 
the  work  of  the  theatre  the  Little  Country  Thea- 
tre of  North  Dakota  Agricultural  College  at  Fargo 
was  established  "to  use  the  drama  and  all  that 
goes  with  the  drama  as  a  sociological  force  in 
getting  people  together  and  acquainted  with  one 
another."  At  first  view  this  purpose  would  seem 
to  be  aside  from  that  of  the  theatre  and  to  lie  in 
the  region  of  social  economics.  But  this  would  be 
a  narrow  view.  The  work  of  the  Little  Country 
Theatre  in  preparing  its  three  score  of  plays, 
many  of  them  local  and  racial,  has  been  a  dis- 
tinct contribution  at  the  heart  of  the  American 
theatre.  There  are  many  who  will  undertake  the 
work  of  the  theatre  to  one  who  will  undertake 
that  fundamental  work  upon  which  the  new 
theatre  must  be  built.  A.  G.  Arvold  has  social 
vision,  and  his  Little  Country  Theatre  with  its 
coffee-tower  has  come  to  be  symbolic  of  what  the 
theatre  may  mean  when  its  uses  are  better  un- 
derstood. In  the  same  state  has  been  done  the 
work  of  F.  H.  Koch  in  the  University  of  the 
State  at  Grand  Forks.  Using  the  instrumentali- 
ties of  the  University  as  a  nucleus  Koch  has  done 


BREAKING  A  NEW  FURROW       73 

much  to  develop  an  active  spirit  of  cooperation 
in  building  up  a  provincial  theatre. 

Beginning  in  1911  somewhat  after  the  model 
of  some  of  the  older  amateur  societies  the  Plays 
and  Players  Club  of  Philadelphia  has  broadened 
its  work  in  such  a  way  as  to  keep  abreast  of  the 
latest  developments  in  the  theatre.  Its  purpose 
is  "to  associate  the  amateur  histrionic  talent  and 
playwrights  of  the  community  for  the  advance- 
ment and  production  of  amateur  theatricals  and 
for  literary  and  social  intercourse."  In  pursuing 
these  purposes  it  has  become  a  very  influential  or-  . 
ganization.  The  scope  of  its  work  is  so  broad,  it  j 
is  so  thoroughly  organized,  its  membership  is  so 
large,  the  number  of  its  productions  is  so  great 
that  it  serves  as  a  stimulating  example  of  what 
can  be  done  by  a  city  in  behalf  of  its  own  culti- 
vation in  matters  of  the  theatre. 

It  must  be  remembered  that  this  is  distinctly  an 
accessory  organization.  It  has  no  desire  to  es- 
tablish theatres  or  to  send  out  regular  companies. 
It  is  a  clearing  house,  a  publicity  board,  a  promot- 
ing committee  for  good  drama.  Partly  explain- 
ing its  success,  it  is  an  exclusive  club.  The  Plays 
and  Players  Club  has  been  in  existence  for  six  sea- 
sons. It  has  a  club  house  of  its  own.  It  is  man- 


74       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

aged  by  a  board  of  eight  directors  and  has  in  its 
working  membership  some  of  the  best  known  peo- 
ple of  the  city.  It  is  a  veritable  play-factory, 
sometimes  as  many  as  three  and  four  plays  being 
rehearsed  by  different  groups  at  one  time  in  the 
club  house.  Sixty  performances  are  given  a  year 
in  centers  throughout  Philadelphia  and  in  neigh- 
boring places.  No  old  plays  are  given  and  a  large 
percentage  of  the  productions  are  the  first  on  any 
stage.  The  power  of  such  an  organization  as 
this  cannot  be  overestimated. 

What  has  been  done  in  Wisconsin,  in  North 
Dakota,  and  in  Philadelphia  has  been  repeated 
in  scores  of  centers  all  over  the  country.  Ad- 
mittedly work  of  this  kind  can  never  take  rank 
with  the  solid  artistic  achievements  of  expert  com- 
panies, nor  with  the  way-breaking  efforts  of  such 
men  as  Donald  Robertson.  But  in  their  func- 
tion, in  plowing  the  ground  for  a  later  harvest, 
they  serve  a  valuable  if  preliminary  part. 


THE  LITTLE  THEATRE 

WHAT  is  the  little  theatre?  I  can  imagine  some- 
one removed  by  but  five  years  from  a  knowledge 
of  American  theatrical  conditions  asking  this  ques- 
tion with  some  perplexity.  Perhaps  part  of  the 
answer  to  the  question  may  have  been  implied  in 
what  has  gone  before.  We  have  seen  the  great 
need  of  the  theatre  in  three  respects,  a  better 
system  of  expense  values;  a  more  dependable  and 
enlightened  audience;  an  impulse  coming  from 
the  artists  rather  than  from  the  investors.  The 
little  theatre  has  represented  an  effort  to  supply 
these  things. 

There  are  some  things  the  little  theatre  is  not. 
It  is  not  a  repertory  theatre,  a  municipal  theatre, 
an  endowed  theatre,  or  an  experimental  theatre. 
All  of  these  are  respectable  institutions  which  for 
their  own  sake  and  that  of  the  little  theatre,  an- 
other respectable  institution,  should  be  kept  in 
their  proper  places.  It  is  not  a  repertory  theatre 

75 


76       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

in  that  while  it  may  use  the  repertory  principle 
it  is  something  more  than  a  repertory  theatre. 
It  is  not  a  municipal  theatre  though  it  may  serve 
the  purpose.  It  is  not  an  endowed  theatre  for 
the  reason  that  the  best  little  theatres  often  work 
without  funds.  And  it  is  not  an  experimental 
theatre  any  more  than  any  venture  starting  to 
work  in  untried  fields  is  experimental.  The  ex- 
perimental theatre  is  a  laboratory  theatre  for  the 
testing  of  the  tools  of  the  theatre.  We  will  treat 
it  in  a  later  chapter. 

We  may  answer  the  question  "What  is  a  little 
theatre*?"  by  reference  to  the  activities  of  the  last 
five  years.  Judging  from  these  it  may  be  said 
that  the  little  theatre  is  four  things.  It  is  a  build- 
ing; it  is  a  principle  of  economical  manage- 
ment; it  is  a  cooperative  guild  of  artists  of  the 
theatre;  and  it  is  a  system  of  alliance  with  the 
federated  audience.  Properly  it  is  a  combination 
of  all  of  these  things. 

The  little  theatre  is  first  of  all  a  small  build- 
ing for  plays  given  in  an  intimate  way.  It  usu- 
ally contains  fewer  than  three  hundred  seats,  the 
number  in  some  places  set  by  law  as  the  figure 
upon  which  building  requirements  are  stipulated. 
The  Little  Theatre,  the  Punch  and  Judy  Theatre, 
the  Princess  Theatre,  the  Bandbox  Theatre  of 


THE  LITTLE  THEATRE  7? 


New  York  all  seat  approximately  300.  The  first 
Toy  Theatre  in  Boston  seated  under  (loo)  The 
Little  Theatre  in  Chicago  seated  less  than  a  hun- 
dred. The  little  theatre  of  the  Vagabond  Players 
of  Baltimore  seats  62.  In  theory  these  theatres 
are  modelled  after  the  Theatre  des  Arts  in  Paris, 
the  Kammerspiele  in  Berlin,  the  Little  Theatre 
and  the  Kingsway  Theatres  in  London. 

Did  the  term  little  theatre  refer  only  to  seat- 
ing capacity  all  small  theatres  without  distinc- 
tion would  belong  to  the  class.  But  little  theatre 
means  more  than  this.  It  is  a  building  which  is 
run  in  a  particular  way  and  for  a  particular  pur- 
pose. It  belongs  to  the  class  little  theatre  only 
to  the  extent  that  it  satisfies  these  other  condi- 
tions. The  little  theatre  is  run  upon  the  theory 
of  absolute  economy  of  management.  Someone 
has  called  it  a  "complete  theatre  reduced  from 
average  dimensions."  This  reduction  extends  to 
all  the  factors  of  the  theatre,  the  size  of  the  audi- 
ence, the  number  of  performances,  the  code  of 
production,  the  size  of  plays,  and  the  budget  sheet. 
The  little  theatre  depends  upon  the  reduction  of 
all  the  factors  of  a  production  to  the  lowest  terms. 
Actors  are  not  paid.  Scenery  is  simple  and  made 
at  home  cheaply.  Plays  are  not  paid  for  and  are 
given  only  as  often  as  there  is  call  for  them. 


78       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

These  requirements  sharply  limit  the  little 
theatre.  Immediately  there  disappear  from  the 
class  such  theatres  as  Ames's  Little  Theatre,  the 
Punch  and  Judy  Theatre,  the  Princess  Theatre, 
the  Bramhall  Theatre,  all  of  which  are  run  on 
the  business  system  of  the  professional  theatre. 
And  by  a  paradox  there  appear  in  the  list  some 
companies  that  play  in  larger  theatres,  such  as 
the  Washington  Square  Players  who  began  as  a 
little  theatre  company  and  though  now  playing 
in  a  larger  theatre  retain  many  little  theatre  at- 
tributes. 

I  come  now  to  the  consideration  of  the  third 
means  of  identification  of  the  little  theatre.  The 
little  theatre  is  a  guild  of  artists.  What  is  meant 
by  this?  We  have  seen  that  the  commercial 
theatre  labors  under  certain  disadvantages. 
Both  on  the  side  of  the  money  features  of  the 
theatre  and  on  the  side  of  its  artistic  functions 
the  commercial  theatre  is  full  of  pitfalls  and  dis- 
couragements. And  yet  it  is  found  that  anyone 
who  tries  to  improve  either  one  of  these  features 
in  the  commercial  theatre  has  his  way  blocked  by 
the  very  forces  which  he  is  attempting  to  correct. 
The  conclusion  is  that  the  only  way  to  do  it  is  to 
do  it  from  without.  The  little  theatre  is  a  means 
of  solving  both  these  problems,  the  problems  of 


THE  LITTLE  THEATRE  79 

expense  and  the  problems  of  art.  It  attacks  them 
separately,  but  so  closely  do  they  hang  together 
that  their  solution  is  mutual.  The  little  theatre 
exchanges  for  the  impulse  to  work  which  comes 
from  the  promise  of  reward  the  impulse  that 
comes  from  the  possibility  of  labor  in  pleasurable 
enterprises. 

The  importance  of  this  principle  as  applied  to 
the  commercial  theatre  is  not  far  to  seek  but  it 
can  only  be  adverted  to  here.  Much  as  the  com- 
mercial theatre  depends  upon  artists  it  is  found 
that  a  large  part  of  the  expense  of  a  production 
is  to  be  traced  to  the  high  money  equivalent  that 
has  been  attached  to  the  art  functions  of  a  piece. 
The  author,  the  actors,  the  director,  the  musicians, 
the  scene  painter  have  all  learned  to  attach  a  high 
money  value  to  service.  And  while  the  expense 
of  a  production  has  been  rising  the  artist  has  lost 
much.  He  has  lost  for  one  thing  personal  asso- 
ciation with  his  manager,  which  was  the  rule  in 
the  theatre  until  very  recently.  The  greatest 
lament  that  went  up  after  the  death  of  Charles 
Frohman  came  from  those  actors  who  had  lost  a 
friend,  the  last  New  York  manager  to  hold  his 
artists  by  force  of  personality.  The  impulse  of 
personal  association  in  artistic  work,  the  loss  of 
which  is  so  much  to  be  deplored  in  the  commercial 


8o       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

theatre,  comes  again  in  the  little  theatres  under 
the  spur  of  necessity. 

The  little  theatre  goes  about  to  avoid  both  the 
high  expense  of  the  commercial  theatre  and  its 
cold  commercial  contracts  and  it  does  this  at  one 
blow.  It  does  it  by  identifying  the  two,  reduc- 
ing the  expense  of  each  item  to  its  lowest  terms 
by  putting  that  item  upon  the  artist  to  execute 
and  expecting  the  artist  to  do  it  for  the  love  of 
the  work. 

There  remains  the  fourth  characteristic  of  the 
little  theatre.  I  have  said  it  is  a  system  of  al- 
liance with  the  audience.  The  little  theatre  de- 
pends upon  the  minimum  support  of  an  intelligent 
audience.  At  the  start  it  does  not  need  a  large 
audience.  It  lays  its  pattern  closely  by  the  cloth 
before  it  is  cut.  It  binds  the  audience  to  itself  by 
subscriptions  and  guarantees.  It  identifies  itself 
with  the  audience,  sometimes  even  drawing  its 
workers  from  among  the  audience.  Not  least 
among  the  achievements  of  the  little  theatres  has 
been  the  fact  that  they  have  federated  the  audi- 
ences for  particular  purposes,  that  they  have  given 
solidity  and  direction  to  the  interests  of  those  who 
were  anxious  for  a  new  dramatic  fare. 

How  have  they  managed  this  last  and  most 
difficult  feat?  Simply  through  the  spirit  that 


THE  LITTLE  THEATRE  81 

was  in  them,  a  spirit  to  which  an  audience  could 
respond  and  which  they  were  glad  to  support. 
The  little  theatre  has  been  called  "a  place  of  en- 
tertainment for  intelligent  people."  It  has  come 
to  be  this  through  the  fact  that  artists  have  come 
to  be  the  workers,  through  the  fact  that  cheap- 
ness of  production  has  demanded  novelty  in  in- 
vention. While  men  work  for  joy  and  are  not 
afraid  of  money  loss  they  are  sure  to  venture 
forth  in  new  lines  of  creation  which  pique  the  in- 
terest. Because  with  all  their  faults  the  little 
theatres  have  done  this  their  audiences  have  grown 
and  solidified. 

Naturally  there  are  some  real  limitations  to 
the  efforts  of  the  little  theatres.  They  cannot 
get  plays  from  great  playwrights,  they  cannot 
hire  experienced  actors,  they  cannot  use  expensive 
sets.  One  grants  all  that  may  be  said  as  to  the 
acting  in  the  little  theatres.  The  amateur  is  not 
as  expert  as  the  professional ;  the  new  playwright 
not  as  sure  of  hand  as  the  Broadway  favorite. 
The  best  of  the  little  theatres  comes  in  their  abil- 
ity to  make  the  most  out  of  their  materials  and 
continually  to  strive  to  improve  these  materials. 
There  are  respects  in  which  the  amateur  is  in 
fact  better  than  the  professional.  But  the  little 
theatre  does  not  cling  to  him  because  he  is  an 


82       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

amateur.  It  clings  to  him  because  he  is  the  best 
that  can  be  secured.  And  it  makes  something 
out  of  him  because  he  brings  freshness  and  zest 
to  his  work.  But  if  the  little  theatre  is  so  mis- 
guided as  to  raise  class  against  class,  to  defend 
the  amateur  as  against  the  professional,  then  it 
forgets  the  cardinal  necessity  of  ever  and  always 
improving  its  work.  The  new  playwright  brings 
something  to  his  task  that  is  worthy  of  praise. 
He  brings  willingness  to  experiment,  a  readiness 
to  break  established  conventions,  sometimes  a 
strain  of  unaccustomed  poetry.  But  if  the  little 
theatre  forgets  the  important  thing  and  searches 
merely  for  the  novel  and  the  strange  then  it  is 
failing  in  its  task.  The  one-act  play  has  been  an 
excellent  expedient  for  the  little  theatre.  It  has 
been  easy  to  write  and  easy  to  produce.  In  in- 
troducing it  the  little  theatre  has  rendered  some 
service  to  the  stage.  But  if  it  begins  to  offer  the 
one-act  play  as  the  only  form  of  stage  art  then  too 
it  is  setting  itself  apart  from  the  rational  laws 
of  growth. 

The  point  is  that  the  little  theatres  have  been 
an  expedient,  filling  an  excellent  place  in  a  transi- 
tion state  of  the  theatre.  They  have  provided 
the  means  by  which  all  the  necessary  new  factors 
of  the  theatre  could  come  together  in  concert. 


THE  LITTLE  THEATRE  83 

Artists,  actors,  painters,  producers,  organizers 
and  audience  have  been  brought  together  for  the 
service  of  a  new  art  for  the  theatre.  Behind  this 
the  avowed  purposes,  the  encouragement  and  sup- 
port of  an  American  drama,  the  giving  voice  and 
tongue  to  a  neighborhood,  the  production  of  the  ^ 
great  masterpieces  of  the  world,  the  elevation  of 
the  taste  of  the  community,  the  improvement  of 
the  canons  of  production  and  of  acting,  the  crea- 
tion of  an  audience,  sink  away  into  the  oblivion 
that  comes  to  professions  under  the  records  of 
deeds.  The  real  forces  that  pressed  the  workers 
on  were  the  urge  to  do  the  plays  they  felt  impelled 
to  produce,  to  do  them  by  the  codes  their  own  art- 
istic sense  said  was  right,  under  methods  of  co- 
operation that  fed  rather  than  starved  the  spirit, 
and  with  the  understanding  support  even  if  of  a 
few. 

There  is  perhaps  some  pleasant  irony  in  the 
fact  that  the  little  theatre  was  the  only  type  of 
insurgent  enterprise  that  could  possibly  have  suc- 
ceeded in  this  day  of  big  business  in  the  theatre. 
It  follows  the  wily  instruction  given  in  other  ac- 
tivities. If  you  would  escape  the  claws  of  cir- 
cumstance do  it  "through  minuteness,  to  wit." 
He  is  a  bold  man  who  attempts  to  meet  the  theatri- 
cal dangers  face  to  face.  Broadway  knows  the 


84       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

names  of  some  who  have  tried  it.  It  knows  the 
names  of  none  who  has  succeeded.  If  you  have  a 
new  word  do  not  blow  a  loud  blast  thinking  that 
thereby  the  walls  of  the  city  will  fall.  The  places 
of  power  do  not  crumble  at  shouted  words  of 
prophecy.  Rather  seek  out  a  niche  in  a  side 
street,  whisper  your  word  to  a  chosen  two  or  three, 
protect  yourself  by  your  lack  of  pretense.  Then 
it  may  be  that  before  long  you  too  will  have  gath- 
ered to  yourself  power.  It  may  even  be  that  in 
due  time  emissaries  will  come  from  high  places 
bearing  gifts. 


VI 
THE  THEATRE  AND  THE  LAW 

THE  way  of  the  innovator  is  not  always  made 
easy  for  him.  Many  enthusiastic  workers  for 
new  fashions  in  the  theatre,  spurred  on  by  the  un- 
selfishness of  their  aims  and  the  reasonableness  of 
their  cause,  have  supposed  that  all  the  institu- 
tions of  society  would  work  in  harmony  with 
them.  They  have  been  somewhat  surprised  and 
discouraged  when  they  found  themselves  in  early 
conflict  with  the  law,  and  to  some  of  them  the 
difficulties  were  so  strong  as  effectually  to  discour- 
age further  efforts. 

One  who  surveys  the  history  of  the  little  ex- 
perimental theatres  of  the  last  few  years,  noting 
their  timid  efforts  to  get  a  foothold  in  a  busy  and 
unsympathetic  world,  has  been  slightly  amused  to 
see  how  many  of  these  have  been  hampered  by 
official  interference.  He  sees  the  commercial 
theatre  going  forward  with  no  apparent  atten- 
tion from  the  law  even  while  it  is  doing  things 
that  cannot  be  considered  of  the  highest  social 

85 


86       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

value.  But  licenses  have  been  refused,  new 
theatres  have  been  closed,  respectable  managers 
have  been  arrested,  the  expenditures  of  thousands 
of  dollars  have  been  rendered  valueless  through 
the  enforcement  of  seeming  technicalities  against 
ventures  that  in  no  way  bulked  large  in  the  hori- 
zon of  the  law  and  as  a  rule  were  conducted  by 
men  and  women  of  unquestioned  high  motives. 

Does  the  law  discriminate  against  the  new 
theatres?  Has  there  been  conspiracy  deep  and 
dark  against  the  benevolent  reformers  of  things 
in  the  theatre"?  It  might  be  well  for  the  interest 
of  this  book  if  I  could  make  out  such  a  case.  But 
I  cannot  do  so.  Aside  from  the  fact  that  imag- 
ination is  not  the  business  of  the  law,  a  cold 
blooded  thing  usually  based  upon  the  maintenance 
of  things  as  they  were,  I  cannot  find  that  there  is 
any  real  difference  between  the  law  as  enforced 
on  the  established  theatre  and  on  the  new 
theatres.  The  established  theatre  is  run  by  men 
who  know  the  law.  If  they  didn't  they  couldn't 
run  a  theatre  long.  The  new  theatre  is  too  often 
run  by  people  who  know  no  more  about  the  law. 
than  they  do  about  the  theatre.  For  the  sake 
of  these  a  short  statement  of  the  attitude  of  the 
law  as  it  turns  toward  the  theatre  would  seen 
to  be  appropriate. 


THE  THEATRE  AND  THE  LAW     87 

From  the  earliest  times  the  law  has  kept  a 
peculiar  hold  on  the  theatre.  It  has  to  be  remem- 
bered that  the  theatre  has  not  been  with  us  from 
the  start.  It  broke  its  way  into  Anglo-Saxon  so- 
ciety from  places  outside  the  city  gate  and  it 
came  in  with  the  wastrels  and  the  beggars  and 
mountebanks.  Legislation  on  the  theatre  is  to 
this  day  tainted  with  these  associations.  The 
least  that  can  be  said  of  the  theatre  in  its  relation 
to  the  fundamental  law  is  that  it  is  under  sus- 
picion, that  the  presumption  is  against  it. 

Of  late  years  the  extreme  presumption  has  been 
somewhat  relaxed.  Particularly  in  the  large 
cities  the  theatre  is  seen  to  be  one  of  the  chief 
businesses  of  the  city.  But  it  is  a  business  of  a 
peculiarly  public  character,  one  of  the  last  busi- 
nesses involving  the  regular  service  of  a  large 
number  of  people  which  has  not  been  brought  un- 
der close  public  control,  which  remains  in  fact  a 
private  business.  The  city  has  come  to  look  upon 
the  theatre  as  a  place  of  public  congregation  and 
therefore  a  place  to  be  kept  strictly  under  the 
public  eye;  as  a  place  of  large  income  and  there- 
fore a  place  to  be  taxed. 

The  laws  as  applied  to  the  theatres  have  come 
to  be  of  two  general  purposes,  for  the  upholding  of 
the  dignities  and  the  protection  of  society  in  its 


88       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

moral  and  social  and  governmental  standards, 
and  for  the  protection  of  the  individual  member 
of  the  audience  while  he  is  an  attendant  upon  the 
theatre.  To  these  two  classes  belong  all  the  laws 
applied  to  the  theatre.  To  the  first  class  -belong 
the  Sunday  laws,  the  laws  against  vice  and  ob- 
scenity, and  such  censorship  laws  as  there  are. 
To  the  second  class  belong  the  building  restric- 
tions, the  fire  and  tenement  restrictions,  the  laws 
pertaining  to  the  inner  regulation  and  manage- 
ment of  the  theatre.  Upon  the  satisfying  of 
these  laws  depends  the  securing  and  retaining  of 
a  Ikense. 

Now  all  theatres  without  distinction  have  to 
obey  these  laws,  the  commercial  theatres  as  well 
as  the  non-commercial  theatres.  In  fact  the  com- 
mercial theatre  managers  know  better  how  to  ad- 
just themselves  to  the  law,  sometimes,  be  it  ad- 
mitted, to  the  ensign  of  the  law,  than  do  the 
managers  of  the  new  theatres,  and  therefore  they 
avoid  the  public  signs  of  discontent.  But  they 
are  all  under  continual  scrutiny.  The  organ- 
izer of  a  new  theatre  should  not  suppose  that  he 
is  picked  out  for  adverse  discrimination,  but  he 
should  attempt  to  learn  not  only  the  laws  but 
the  particular  measures  by  which  in  every  case  the 


law  is  put  into  practice.  By  so  doing  he  will 
escape  much  trouble. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  learn  the  laws  with  refer- 
ence  to  theatres.  As  a  rule  the  laws  of  the  states 
that  apply  to  theatres  are  very  general.  The 
states  delegate  to  the  municipality  the  right  to  li- 
cense and  regulate  theatres  in  their  own  way,  re- 
serving such  matters  as  Sunday  laws  and  general 
safety  laws  and  labor  laws.  So  the  laws  should 
usually  be  looked  up  in  the  Codes  of  the  Alder- 
men of  the  City.  For  New  York  City  the  laws 
are  in  Chapters  3  and  5  of  the  Code  of  Ordinances 
under  Amusements  and  Exhibitions  and  under 
the  Building  Code.  In  Chicago  the  laws  may  be 
found  in  Brundage's  Chicago  Code  under  IVC  and 
V  of  the  Building  Ordinances.  For  St.  Louis 
they  are  found  in  Rombauer's  Revised  Code  of 
St.  Louis. 

Let  us  look  first  at  the  building  laws,  for  these 
are  the  laws  that  must  first  be  observed.  The 
chief  purpose  of  the  building  laws  is  to  provide 
safety  against  fire  and  against  panic.  The  terms 
of  these  laws  refer  therefore  to  number  and  place- 
ment of  exits,  to  fireproofing  of  scenery,  protect- 
ing curtains,  to  width  of  aisles,  to  quality  of 
building  material,  to  slope  and  position  of  audi- 


go       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

torium,  and  to  the  presence  in  the  building  of 
tenements  and  dwelling  places.  One  of  the  most 
important  laws  applying  to  theatres  as  well  as 
to  other  businesses  in  New  York  City  is  the  so- 
called  zone  law,  passed  July  25,  1916,  regulating 
the  height  and  bulk  of  buildings  and  restricting 
the  locations  of  trades  and  industries.  As  far  as 
this  applies  to  the  theatre  it  lists  the  theatre  un- 
der business  and  requires  that  no  theatre  be  placed 
in  a  residence  district.  In  Chicago  there  is  regu- 
lation for  frontage  consent  in  residence  districts 
and  for  the  maintenance  of  certain  distances  from 
hospitals,  schools  and  churches.  In  St.  Louis  no 
license  can  issue  except  by  consent  of  a  majority 
of  the  residents  of  the  block. 

At  one  point  in  the  building  laws  there  comes 
in  a  distinction  that  has  been  often  misunderstood. 
It  has  to  do  with  the  size  of  the  theatre  and  the 
consequent  restrictions  as  to  fireproofing  construc- 
tion. Several  cities,  among  them  New  York  and 
Chicago,  make  a  distinction  as  to  building  require- 
ments between  the  theatre  that  seats  300  people 
and  over  and  the  theatre  that  seats  under  300.  In 
New  York  City  the  requirements  of  absolute  fire- 
proof construction  apply  only  to  theatres  over 
forty  feet  in  height,  containing  5000  square  feet 
and  seating  over  300  people.  In  Chicago  as 


THE  THEATRE  AND  THE  LAW     91 

well  there  is  a  difference  in  building  requirements 
for  theatres  seating  more  and  less  than  three  hun- 
dred people. 

Granted  that  the  ordinances  for  fire,  tenement, 
and  zone  restriction  are  satisfied  in  the  plans  for 
the  theatre,  one  is  ready  to  apply  for  a  license 
and  to  pay  the  fee.  The  system  of  licensing  and 
control  maintained  by  different  cities  varies  but 
the  principles  are  the  same.  Here  enter  further 
points  that  are  often  misunderstood.  A  license 
is  granted  as  a  rule  on  account  of  the  public  char- 
acter of  an  enterprise  and  this  is  judged  by  the 
fact  that  an  admission  fee  is  charged.  Contrary 
to  rather  common  belief  there  is,  so  far  as  I  know, 
no  case  in  which  a  seating  capacity  of  under  300 
relieves  from  the  necessity  of  taking  a  license. 
If  the  little  theatre  is  open  to  the  public  for  fee 
it  is  compelled  to  carry  a  license.  The  only  way 
in  which  a  license  fee  can  be  avoided  is  by  not 
running  the  theatre  for  profit  or  by  not  opening 
it  to  the  general  public.  This  is  true  of  small 
theatres  as  well  as  large. 

The  license  requirements  may  be  rapidly  sum- 
marized. In  New  York  the  license  is  granted 
by  a  Commissioner  of  Licenses  who  has  the  dis- 
cretion to  include  provisions  which  in  his  judg- 
ment are  necessary.  The  fee  for  theatres  is  $500 


Q2 

and  for  separate  performances  is  $25.  In  Chi- 
cago there  are  21  legal  classes  of  amusements  of 
which  only  the  first  is  important  to  us.  The 
license  is  issued  by  authority  of  the  Mayor,  the 
fee  depending  on  the  admission  fee  to  be  charged. 
If  the  admission  is  a  dollar  or  more  the  fee  for 
license  is  $1000,  if  from  fifty  cents  to  a  dollar, 
$400,  and  the  license  fee  runs  down  to  $200  for 
theatres  charging  a  maximum  of  twenty  cents  a 
seat.  In  Boston  there  is  a  licensing  board  on 
which  the  Mayor  has  great  powers.  No  fee  is 
mentioned.  In  St.  Louis  the  license  fee  is  $25  a 
month  or  $150  a  year.  In  many  states  and 
cities  the  license  fees  are  still  merely  nominal. 

We  come  now  to  the  consideration  of  those 
laws  which  govern  the  management  of  the  theatre 
after  it  has  secured  a  license.  These  are  in  gen- 
eral the  laws  against  vice  and  immorality,  which 
are  subject  to  wide  latitude  in  character  and  in- 
terpretation, and  in  particular  the  laws  against 
Sunday  performances  and  against  child-labor  on 
the  stage.  The  last  two  have  been  of  some  impor- 
tance in  the  management  of  theatres.  The  laws 
on  Sunday  observance  are  based  on  the  moral  prin- 
ciples of  early  Colonial  times  when  even  travel 
was  forbidden.  The  situation  in  New  York  is 
sufficiently  typical.  The  Constitution  of  the 


THE  THEATRE  AND  THE  LAW     93 

state  has  been  held  to  give  the  legislature  the 
right  to  protect  the  Christian  Sunday  from  dese- 
cration by  such  laws  as  it  may  deem  necessary. 
A  law  that  attracted  a  great  deal  of  attention, 
and  still  stands  as  the  law  of  the  state,  was 
passed  by  the  legislature  of  1860  (Chapter  501) 
applying  particularly  to  New  York  County,  en- 
titled "An  Act  to  preserve  the  public  peace  and 
order  on  the  first  day  of  the  week,  commonly 
called  Sunday."  This  act  provided  that  it 
should  not  be  lawful  to  exhibit  on  Sunday  any 
interlude,  tragedy,  comedy,  opera,  ballet,  farce, 
negro  minstrelsy  or  any  other  entertainment  of 
the  stage,  or  any  performance  of  jugglers,  acro- 
bats or  rope  dancers,  under  a  penalty  of  $500 
to  be  collected  by  the  Society  for  the  Protection 
of  Juvenile  Delinquents,  and  a  loss  of  the  license. 

This  law  was  held  to  be  constitutional  and  was 
supplemented  by  municipal  statutes  providing 
that  one  may  not  exhibit  on  Sunday  "to  the  pub- 
lic" the  performance  of  any  tragedy,  comedy, 
opera,  ballet,  farce,  negro  minstrelsy,  negro  or 
other  dancing,  etc.,  "but  nothing  therein  prohibits 
sacred  or  educational,  vocal  or  instrumental  con- 
certs, lectures,  addresses,  recitations  or  singing." 

This  law  was  so  far  reaching  that  immediately 
there  began  efforts  to  evade  it.  The  means  of 


94       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

evasion  was  provided  in  the  last  clause  above 
quoted.  As  it  occurs,  the  association  of  this  law 
with  certain  other  laws  of  the  state  is  rather  in- 
timate. Peaceful  assembly  is  guaranteed  on  Sun- 
day as  well  as  on  other  days  of  the  week,  and  as- 
semblage for  worship  is  protected.  It  became 
necessary  only  to  identify  the  theatre  with  peace- 
ful assembly  and  assembly  for  worship.  There 
came  the  question,  "What  is  a  theatrical  enter- 
tainment, and  what  is  a  stage,  legally  consid- 
ered1?" Ingenious  men  set  themselves  to  discover 
subterfuges  whereby  the  theatrical  could  be  pro- 
tected under  the  sacred.  By  interpretation  of 
the  law  theatrical  was  made  to  mean  that  which 
has  a  curtain  which  rises  and  falls,  that  which 
uses  costumes  and  make-up  and  scene  changes  and 
has  a  continuous  story  So  with  regard  to  these 
things  the  sacred  concert  was  invented,  with  no 
change  of  scenery,  no  make-up  and  fancy  costume, 
and  no  continuous  story.  This  played  naturally 
into  the  hands  of  the  variety  entertainment,  the 
only  class  of  theatre  which  has  successfully 
evaded  the  Sunday  laws. 

It  is  not  to  be  expected  that  the  reforming  man- 
ager will  have  any  intention  of  giving  sacred  con- 
certs. But  he  has  been  concerned  with  two  fea- 
tures of  the  law  which  for  many  reasons  it  has 


THE  THEATRE  AND  THE  LAW     95 

often  been  to  his  interest  to  evade.  On  account 
of  the  slimness  of  his  budget  and  the  difficulty 
of  getting  theatres  on  week  days  it  is  sometimes 
desirable  for  him  to  evade  the  Sunday  laws  and 
to  avoid  the  payment  of  high  fees  for  license. 
How  are  these  things  done*?  Either  by  running 
as  an  organization  without  profit  or  by  running 
as  a  private  organization  without  public  sale  of 
seats.  For  many  reasons  the  latter  of  these  plans 
is  the  more  efficacious.  Over  private  clubs  which 
make  no  appeal  for  public  support  the  city  has 
no  more  control  than  it  has  over  one's  home.  But 
it  has  control  of  the  building  requirements,  and 
whether  the  organization  runs  for  profit  or  not,  is 
public  or  private,  these  must  be  satisfied. 

There  is  another  type  of  law  which  has  had  a 
severe  influence  both  on  the  commercial  theatre 
and  the  new  staging  groups.  These  are  the  laws 
affecting  child-labor  which  during  the  last  few 
years  have  been  passed  in  most  of  the  states  of 
the  union.  The  oldest  of  these  laws  passed 
twenty  or  thirty  years  ago,  forbid  the  employment 
of  children  "in  dangerous  and  immoral  occupa- 
tions" by  which  were  meant  "acrobatic,  singing 
and  dancing  exhibitions."  Today  children  under 
from  14  to  16  are  enjoined  from  playing  in  places 
of  amusement,  or  theatres,  or  working  at  night, 


96       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

in  thirty-one  of  the  states.  The  only  states  which 
have  no  laws  on  child-labor  are  Vermont,  North 
and  South  Carolina,  Tennessee,  Mississippi, 
Texas,  Oklahoma,  and  New  Mexico.  Eleven 
states  made  provisions  against  child-labor  in  the 
theatre  which  however  are  subject  to  relief  under 
certain  circumstances  upon  application  for  a  per- 
mit to  Judge,  Mayor,  Commissioner  or  Inspector. 
These  states  which  represent  the  best  practice  in 
safeguarding  both  the  child  and  the  theatre  are 
California,  Colorado,  Delaware,  District  of  Co- 
lumbia, Kentucky,  Louisiana,  Maryland,  Min- 
nesota, New  York,  Rhode  Island  and  Wisconsin. 


VII 
DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES 

ONE  who  observes  Movements,  so-called,  is  con- 
tinually impressed  with  the  recurrence  under  vari- 
ous names  and  different  disguises  of  the  identical 
motive.  It  is  as  if  behind  a  confused  face  of 
things  the  driving  impulses  were  but  few  and  that 
these  cloaked  themselves  in  different  forms  simply 
to  meet  particular  circumstances.  Observing  the 
form  one  gets  the  sense  of  a  tremendous  confu- 
sion of  issues,  forces  contending  with  each  other, 
blocking  each  other,  hampering  by  misinterpreta- 
tion and  useless  duplication  the  accomplishment 
of  the  end.  But  judging  by  the  forces  behind  the 
form  one  sees  more  evidence  of  a  plan  in  all  things. 
For  the  forms  are  many,  the  forces  are  few. 

This  is  no  less  true  in  the  theatre  than  in  other 
social  affairs.  As  one  looks  at  the  recent  move- 
ments as  a  whole  one  wonders  which  to  be  the 
more  surprised  at,  the  general  lack  of  real  agree- 
ment as  to  what  is  being  undertaken,  agreement, 
that  is,  in  terms  and  tools  and  ends,  or  the  real  or- 

97 


98       THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

derliness  with  which  in  spite  of  muddled  thoughts 
the  different  parts  are  throwing  themselves  into 
their  proper  places.  Throughout  all  these  activi- 
ties two  camps  appear  again  and  again,  the  camp 
of  the  social  thinkers  who  look  upon  the  drama 
as  the  means  of  saving  society,  and  the  camp  of 
the  artists  who  care  nothing  for  social  causes,  who 
ask  permission  only  to  work  in  their  niche.  The 
suspicion  between  these  two  has  been  more  fierce 
than  that  between  the  newer  and  the  older  order 
in  the  theatre.  These  have  respectively  the  graces 
of  respect  and  fear  the  one  for  the  other.  But  in 
the  camps  there  is  only  mistrust  and  the  imputa- 
tion of  the  confounding  of  great  causes. 

But  there  is  no  essential  quarrel  between  these 
two.  Laud  as  we  will  the  high  lonely  place  of 
the  artist,  he  still  works  with  his  fellows  particu- 
larly in  the  theatre.  And  what  is  the  social 
worker  doing  but  creating  a  theatre  in  which  the 
artist  will  have  a  better  chance?  There  is  not 
even  the  difference  that  one  has  a  purpose  and 
the  other  has  but  a  blind  intention  to  be  and  do. 
Both  are  driven  by  the  same  motive,  and  by  co- 
ordinate means  both  are  working  for  the  same 
object.  There  will  probably  always  be  the  two 
groups  in  the  world,  those  who  see  Meanings,  and 
those  who  say  "Nonsense."  But  they  are  not 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES         99 

enemies  or  alien  to  each  other.  Indeed  both  rep- 
resent different  moods  in  the  same  individual. 
For  what  artist  has  failed  at  some  moment  of 
weakness  to  see  his  work  in  terms  of  Man,  and 
what  social  idealist  has  not  wished  to  dedicate 
himself  to  the  "God  of  Things  as  They  Are?" 

It  often  seems  to  one  who  looks  on  from  out- 
side that  schools  do  not  take  up  a  thing  until  that 
thing  can  get  along  very  nicely  without  them. 
True  as  this  is  it  constitutes  no  charge  against 
the  schools.  It  is  not  the  business  of  education 
to  push  new  intellectual  wares.  Schools  do  not 
create;  they  test  and  guarantee. 

But  beyond  this  primary  function  of  the  testing 
of  values  there  is  another  that  is  coming  to  have 
increasing  scope.  It  has  to  do  with  the  service 
education  can  perform  in  the  creation  of  new 
truth  in  its  laboratories.  The  investigative  and 
constructive  work  of  the  laboratory  has  become  the 
rock  upon  which  higher  education  is  built.  The 
laboratory  treats  not  only  the  exact  and  the  nat- 
ural sciences  but  it  has  come  in  late  years  to  apply 
itself  to  the  social  forces  upon  which  the  functions 
of  democracy  depend.  In  this  way  the  university 
laboratory  has  become  more  than  a  place  of  re- 
search into  social,  political  and  economic  affairs. 


ioo     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

It  has  become  a  veritable  pathfinder.  By  the  logic 
of  the  activity  itself  this  laboratory  work  is  pro- 
gressive and  constructive.  It  would  be  unfaithful 
to  the  principle  of  truth  if  it  did  not  throw  force 
behind  its  discoveries  and  endow  with  the  warmth 
of  approval  the  new  principles  it  has  uncovered. 

While  this  is  the  case  in  the  utilitarian  arts 
of  democracy  one  notices  with  a  shock  of  surprise 
that  so  far  education  has  refused  to  apply  these 
principles  to  those  other  forces  so  closely  related 
with  the  utilitarian,  the  aesthetic  and  imaginative 
interests  of  the  state.  On  this  side  universities 
continue  to  be  simply  tabulating  institutions. 
While  the  world  outside  is  teeming  with  experi- 
ments they  refuse  to  provide  these  experiments 
laboratory  room  or  to  give  to  them  the  use  of 
their  machinery  or  the  sanction  of  their  names. 

This  is  no  charge  against  the  men  in  the  uni- 
versities. It  refers  to  a  temper  that  apparently 
governs  in  all  institutions,  a  temper  that  presumes 
that  art  is  fixed  and  static,  that  it  is  worth  while 
only  after  it  is  dead,  while  politics  is  vital  and 
is  subject  to  immediate  judgment.  This  atti- 
tude has  done  much  to  lay  an  improper  emphasis 
on  all  that  pertains  to  literature  and  art  in  the 
universities  and  thoroughly  to  alienate  those  who 
practice  the  arts  in  our  day.  It  has  made  all  the 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES       101 

work  of  the  universities  in  these  fields  simply  a 
survey  of  past  processes  and  has  closed  the  door 
to  any  laboratory  work  in  the  living  principles  of 
the  arts. 

These  conditions  are  serious  enough  when  ap- 
plied to  literature.  They  are  absolutely  fatal 
when  applied  to  the  theatre,  an  art  that  depends 
so  largely  upon  instrumentalities  apart  from  the 
printed  page,  and  vital  to  the  time.  A  survey  of 
the  place  of  the  theatre  in  the  modern  university 
curriculum  shows  some  very  striking  things.  It 
shows  that  the  theatre  is  taking  a  large  and  in- 
creasing place  in  the  outlay  of  educational  work 
and  that  a  large  share  of  this  refers  simply  to  the 
critical  aspects  of  drama  study.  It  shows  an  al- 
most hysterical  activity  on  the  part  of  the  stu- 
dents in  histrionic  matters,  an  activity  outlawed 
and  undirected  and  in  some  cases  crudely  re- 
pressed. It  shows  some  slight  recognition  of  the 
dramatic  as  a  function  in  education  but  no  recog- 
nition of  the  theatre  as  an  instrument  of  the  state. 
And  finally  it  shows  some  efforts  to  establish 
within  the  university  as  a  part  of  the  investiga- 
tive and  experimental  work  laboratories  of  the 
theatre.  In  the  only  case  in  which  this  effort  has 
been  successful  this  laboratory  lies  outside  the  uni- 
versity and  maintains  but  a  narrow  channel  of 


102      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

communication  with  the  institution  through  the 
medium  of  one  man. 

Without  taking  up  here  the  question  as  to 
whether  an  art  can  be  taught  it  is  manifest  that 
the  universities  could  to-day  be  of  the  broadest 
service  in  this  active  field  of  a  reawakening 
theatre.  Nothing  makes  this  more  evident  than 
the  futility  of  the  efforts  at  education  put  forth 
by  the  average  dramatic  school.  The  university 
can  apply  to  the  treatment  of  the  problems  of  the 
theatre  those  methods  by  which  higher  education 
is  supported  and  justified,  an  absence  of  warmth 
which  is  commonly  known  as  the  scientific  spirit, 
a  power  of  analysis  and  organization  of  intellec- 
tual materials,  and  a  breadth  of  vision  that  comes 
from  a  conspectus  of  all  fields  of  human  activity 
at  one  view. 

The  drama  as  such  is  no  stranger  in  college 
halls.  The  Greek  and  Latin  dramatists  have  long 
had  a  place  in  the  curriculums.  With  the  col- 
lapse of  classical  studies  the  Elizabethan  drama- 
tists took  their  place.  During  recent  years  inter- 
est in  the  predecessors  and  contemporaries  of 
Shakespeare  has  opened  the  most  active  field  for 
teaching  and  investigation.  Then  the  interest 
stepped  downward  from  these  through  the  Resto- 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES       103 

ration  dramatists  and  the  dramatists  of  the  dawn 
of  democracy  in  Germany,  France  and  England  to 
Ibsen  and  the  problem  dramatists.  This  was 
partly  a  natural  flow  of  interest  downward.  But 
largely  it  was  a  change  in  kind,  a  substitution  of 
the  old  safe  materials  for  materials  of  a  more  dis- 
putable nature. 

As  for  college  performances,  these  have  been 
frankly  frivolous,  more  frivolous  than  the  ordi- 
nary amateur  performances,  or  frankly  academic. 
On  the  side  of  the  academic  performances  some- 
thing has  been  done.  There  are  many  records  of 
performances  in  college  halls  of  old  plays  that 
could  not  have  otherwise  been  seen.  "The  Jew 
of  Malta,"  "The  Knight  of  the  Burning  Pestle," 
"Ralph  Roister  Doister,"  Peek's  "Old  Wives' 
Tale,"  "The  Marriage  of  Wit  and  Science," 
"The  Two  Noble  Kinsmen,"  "Friar  Bacon  and 
Friar  Bungay,"  Shirley's  "The  Opportunity," 
"The  Arraignment  of  Paris,"  "Abraham  and 
Isaac"  are  among  the  plays  recorded  in  college 
performances.  Recently  this  interest  has  been 
greatly  specialized  by  the  encouragement  of  the 
performance  in  college  edifices  by  professional  ac- 
tors of  the  great  classic  plays  "CEdipus  Tyran- 
nus"  and  "Agamemnon,"  "Iphigenia  in  Taurus," 


104     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

the  comedies  of  Plautus  and  Terence,  and  the 
French  "Phedre"  have  been  so  given  by  leading 
actors. 

In  another  way  the  educational  institution  has 
been  of  some  service  to  the  stage.  It  has  gathered 
together  the  records  of  the  progress  of  human  in- 
stitutions in  museum  and  libraries.  The  collec- 
tions in  American  drama  in  the  library  of  the 
University  of  Pennsylvania  provide  the  materi- 
als upon  which  the  history  of  American  drama 
will  probably  be  written,  perhaps  by  a  Penn- 
sylvania man.  What  Pennsylvania  has  in  Amer- 
ican drama  is  matched  over  a  larger  field  by  the 
remarkable  Robert  Gould  Shaw  Theatre  Collec- 
tion at  Harvard.  The  Dramatic  Museum  at 
Columbia  has  begun  to  make  collections  of  manu- 
scripts, volumes  and  models  on  the  practical  side 
of  theatre  history. 

Here  we  have  the  university  in  a  narrow  field 
serving  through  class-room  and  museum  the 
cause  of  the  new  drama.  Its  closer  participation 
in  these  interests  is  so  far  limited  to  the  teaching 
of  the  principles  of  dramatic  writing.  These 
courses  began  thirty  years  ago  when  Professor 
Hennequin  added  to  his  courses  at  Yale  a  course 
on  "The  Art  of  Playwriting."  To-day  there  is 
hardly  a  college  that  does  not  include  some  such 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES       105 

course.  Now,  such  a  course  as  this  standing  alone 
and  unassisted  is  quite  unscholarly.  It  fails  to 
take  into  consideration  the  true  nature  of  the 
art  of  the  theatre  which  is  an  art  of  architecture 
more  than  it  is  an  art  of  composition.  If  uni- 
versities are  to  be  true  to  their  principles  they  will 
provide  laboratories  for  this  kind  of  work. 

In  two  institutions  scientific  work  in  the  prac- 
tical art  of  the  theatre  has  gone  far  enough  to 
warrant  careful  consideration.  In  the  first  of 
these,  a  great  university,  this  work  has  been  set 
up  apart  from  the  institution  itself  by  private 
initiative.  In  the  second,  a  leading  institute  of 
art  and  technical  education  the  work  has  been 
adopted  by  the  institution  itself  and  all  the  facili- 
ties of  the  institution  have  been  opened  to  it. 
The  latter  provides  the  only  example  in  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  world  in  which  thoroughly  scientific  work 
has  been  projected  in  the  arts  of  the  theatre  on 
the  basis  of  the  higher  education. 

Of  recent  years  Harvard  has  come  to  great 
eminence  for  its  activity  in  matters  of  the  theatre. 
Playwrights,  designers,  producers  have  come  from 
Harvard  and  have  won  enviable  rank  in  the  pro- 
fession. This  is  to  be  credited  to  two  circum- 
stances, the  fact  that  Boston  is  still  rich  with  the 
best  traditions  of  American  culture  and  the  fact 


106      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

that  Harvard  has  in  her  service  the  genius  of 
G.  P.  Baker.  Baker  has  in  him  the  rare  com- 
bination of  a  scientific  mind  with  an  alert  en- 
thusiasm in  all  things  new  and  worthy.  He  was 
drawn  into  the  drama  as  both  scholar  and  actor. 
For  some  years  he  has  been  giving  courses  in  the 
history  of  English  drama,  in  the  technique  of  the 
drama,  and  in  the  art  of  playwriting.  Through 
these  courses  he  has  turned  out  scores  of  workers 
into  the  field  of  the  American  theatre. 

It  must  be  recognized  that  in  these  courses  Pro- 
fessor Baker  has  the  support  of  the  university  as 
a  whole.  They  are  as  much  a  part  of  the  insti- 
tution's training  for  citizenship  as  are  any  other 
courses  in  the  curriculum.  Having  undertaken 
these  courses  there  are  some  obligations  both  to- 
ward the  students  and  toward  the  science  under 
consideration,  the  obligation  of  a  thorough  treat- 
ment of  this  science  by  all  the  instrumentalities 
of  the  institution.  This  obligation  Professor 
Baker  was  early  in  appreciating.  And  certain 
of  his  students  recognized  it  as  well.  And  so 
the  47  Workshop  came  about  through  the  plan- 
ning of  Professor  Baker  and  the  initiative  of  a 
group  of  young  women  who  raised  five  hundred 
dollars  for  the  purpose. 

The  47  Workshop  is  a  college  laboratory  in 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES       107 

play  construction,  using  the  latter  word  in  its 
broadest  sense.  Its  purpose  is  to  give  the  broad- 
est practical  experience  in  the  handling  of  the 
factors  of  a  production  in  such  a  way  that  the 
principles  underlying  the  processes  may  be  un- 
covered. The  47  Workshop  was  established  in 
1912  by  Professor  Baker  and  a  group  of  Radcliffe 
women.  Its  constituency  is  made  up  from  greater 
Boston  without  regard  to  college  membership  ex- 
cept that  the  central  group  is  composed  of  mem- 
bers from  Baker's  classes  in  theory.  It  is  gov- 
erned by  an  executive  committee  representing  all 
the  activities  of  the  production  of  a  play,  its  stag- 
ing, acting,  lighting,  and  composition.  Professor 
Baker's  own  relationship  with  the  government  of 
the  organization  is  intimate  but  flexible.  For  \  # 
three  years  the  Workshop  war  **™™^i^  in.  an  old 
stable.  About  a  year  ago  it  was  given  temporary  J/ 
quarters  in  a  university  building.  The  produc- 
tions are  given  in  Agassiz  Hall  of  Radcliffe 
College.  The  Workshop  draws  no  funds  from 
the  university.  It  is  supported  by  volunteer  gifts 
of  from  ten  dollars  to  $250  and  by  endowed 
performances  sometimes  given  as  memorials  to 
former  members  of  the  Workshop. 

It  is  the  purpose  of  the  Workshop  to  supply 
that  practical  training  which  is  indispensable  to 


<#&     -  •   '-  • 

io8     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

/  the  tuition  of  the  playwright.  A  play  is  under- 
/  taken  only  after  the  preliminary  work  in  composi- 
tion has  been  completed,  when  it  is  ready  to  be 
"built."  The  Workshop  is  a  trying-out  place 
not  only  of  the  work  of  the  students  but  of  all 
those  principles  by  which  work  in  the  theatre  has 
been  circumscribed.  It  is  in  the  broadest  sense 
descriptive  and  analytical,  yet  experimental  and 
dynamic.  Only  those  plays  are  done  which  are 
considered  worthy  and  these  are  expected  to  rep- 
resent some  new  departure  or  a  venture  aside 
from  principles  that  have  become  stiff  with  much 
use.  The  plays  are  done  by  a  picked  company  of 
volunteer  actors  under  the  direction  of  Profes- 
sor Baker.  The  laboratory  nature  of  the  un- 
dertaking applies  as  well  to  the  principles  of  act- 
ing as  to  the  formulas  of  playwriting.  Care 
has  been  taken  to  draw  into  the  work  painters 
and  designers  of  sets  and  this  work  too  is  put 
under  the  magnifying  lens.  And  particular  at- 
tention has  been  given  to  lighting,  which  is  in 
the  hands  of  one  of  the  most  expert  lighting  art- 
ists in  the  country. 

A  distinguishing  feature  of  the  47  Workshop 
is  a  cooperating  audience.  After  careful  selec- 
tion an  audience  of  four  hundred  people  has  been 
set  apart.  These  are  invited  to  all  performances. 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES       109 

In  return  for  this  attendance  each  one  is  expected 
to  send  in  to  the  committee  his  criticism  of  the 
whole  performance,  acting,  play,  scenery,  ensem- 
ble. If  a  member  consistently  fails  to  report  he 
is  dropped  from  future  audiences.  The  audience 
is  as  much  a  working  part  of  the  organization  as 
is  the  player.  These  criticisms  are  culled  and 
from  them  the  general  reactions  of  the  audience 
are  adduced.  Care  is  taken  to  discriminate  be- 
tween the  reaction  of  the  audience  and  an  ab- 
solute judgment.  As  time  goes  on  the  reactions 
approach  more  nearly  to  absolute  judgments. 
Even  when  they  do  not  they  are  significant  of  what 
the  audience  demands  of  a  play. 

The  system  of  the  Workshop  has  served  sev- 
eral ends.  It  has  supplied  for  young  and  inex- 
perienced playwrights  a  test  of  their  work  before 
an  audience,  with  the  opportunity  to  remake  the 
work  after  a  try-out.  And  it  has  supplied  to 
the  audience  the  material  upon  which  to  sharpen 
and  to  test  its  own  choices.  To  all  the  workers 
it  has  offered  the  opportunity  to  try  out  new  ideas 
and  to  test  in  practice  the  value  of  old  ones.  And 
it  has  offered  an  unusual  means  of  observing  in 
one  place  the  synthesis  of  all  the  parts  of  a  pro- 
duction. 

I  have  tried  to  show  that  the  47  Workshop 


no      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

represents  the  laboratory  activities  of  Harvard's 
contribution  to  the  treatment  of  modern  drama, 
activities  which  have  not  as  yet  been  entirely  ac- 
cepted as  belonging  to  the  principle  of  the  insti- 
tution, and  are  therefore  now  an  appendage. 
The  new  School  of  Drama  of  the  Carnegie  In- 
stitute of  Technology  at  Pittsburgh  is  associated 
with  a  somewhat  different  principle  of  education 
and  the  Institute  has  accepted  its  principle  far 
more  thoroughly  than  has  the  University.  As 
with  Harvard  the  essential  fact  is  that  it  is  a  uni- 
versity with  a  German  standard  of  research,  with 
Carnegie  the  essential  fact  is  that  it  is  a  school  of 
the  technology  of  the  arts.  Baker  approaches 
his  work  from  the  field  of  scholarship  and  rhetoric. 
Stevens  approaches  his  from  the  field  of  the 
painter,  the  etcher,  the  practitioner  of  the  manual 
arts,  and  the  creator  of  pageants.  What  holds 
true  of  the  heads  of  the  work  holds  true  of  the 
systems  upon  which  their  institutions  are  con- 
ducted. The  one  is  a  university;  the  other  an  art 
school. 

The  fact  that  the  Carnegie  Institute  is  a  school 
of  fine  and  applied  art  is  not  without  significance 
in  its  Department  of  the  Drama.  It  brings  to 
bear  upon  the  teaching  of  the  arts  of  the  theatre 
the  regimen  of  observation,  of  manual  training, 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES       111 

of  eye  and  hand  exercise  that  is  the  root  of  art 
instruction.  It  treats  the  theatre  as  one  of  the 
sisterhood  of  the  arts.  Its  tuition  is  based  not 
upon  theory  but  upon  the  training  of  the  faculties. 
Its  rule  is,  first  the  hand  and  then  the  mind,  or 
better,  the  mind  through  the  trained  hand  and 
eye.  That  this  principle  is  a  just  one  is  evi- 
denced by  the  intellectual  work  involved  in  the 
best  painting  and  sculpture.  There  is  no  reason 
why  the  same  principle  should  not  be  applied  to 
the  theatre.  There  is  much  in  it  to  correct  the 
method  of  the  old-fashioned  dramatic  school 
which  as  a  rule  has  been  a  bad  combination  of 
theory  with  external  practice  without  regard  to 
the  principles  of  observation. 

Another  important  feature  of  the  Carnegie  In- 
stitute School  of  Drama  is  the  fact  that  the  major 
influence  of  the  school  happens  to  be  that  in- 
fluence which  is  having  the  greatest  stress  in  the 
new  art  theatre.  This  is  not  so  much  an  external 
as  a  philosophical  influence.  The  function  of 
art  in  the  new  movement  of  the  theatre  has  been 
more  than  the  revolution  in  stage  design  and  back- 
ground. It  has  been  its  function  to  subject  all 
the  practice  of  the  stage  to  the  "pitiless  method" 
that  the  best  artist  represents.  The  influence  of 
the  painter  has  been  so  strong  that  temporarily  he 


112     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

has  seemed  to  usurp  the  place  of  the  dramatic 
director.  It  has  seemed  that  the  picture  might 
overcome  the  drama.  There  is  no  fear  of  this. 
The  painter  has  had  a  real  contribution  to  make. 
If  in  making  it  he  has  pressed  down  the  scale  a 
little  to  his  side  he  has  at  any  rate  provided  for 
drama  standards  of  judgment  beyond  those  it 
has  been  recently  its  wont  to  meet.  The  Carnegie 
Institute,  dedicated  to  the  balance  of  all  the  arts, 
the  manual  as  well  as  the  fine  arts,  has  healthily 
represented  this  service.  It  has  never  been  the 
habit  of  the  directors  to  surrender  to  the  pictorial 
appeal.  Perhaps  because  pictures  are  no  surprise 
to  their  members  they  have  been  able  to  subordi- 
nate line  and  color  and  design  on  the  stage  better 
than  those  who  have  but  lately  discovered  the  use 
of  these  things  in  the  theatre. 

The  principles  upon  which  the  Carnegie  Insti- 
1  tute  School  of  Drama  is  conducted  have  been  care- 
\  fully  studied  and  as  thoroughly  worked  out  in 
practice.     One  is  surprised  in  considering  this  in- 
stitution to  note  that  it  is  only  four  years  old  and 
that  it  has  been  built  up  from  the  ground  with- 
out the  advantage  of  models.     The  school  rep- 
resents a  nice  balance  of  the  practice  of  the  art 
with  the  theories  by  which  this  practice  is  il- 
luminated.    All  the  facilities  of  the  well-equipped 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES       113 

Institute  are  turned  over  to  the  School  of  Drama 
for  the  purposes  of  its  training.  And  it  is  for- 
tunate that  the  Institute  is  so  eclectic  in  its  ac- 
tivities that  it  is  possible  to  find  there  all  the  de- 
partments that  make  up  the  complex  art  of  the 
theatre. 

Always  as  an  ideal  the  School  of  Drama  keeps 
before  it  the  standard  of  general  culture.  This 
ideal  is  represented  in  the  more  general  items  of 
the  curriculum,  the  languages,  the  literatures,  the 
sciences  of  general  learning.  With  this  general 
ideal  it  combines,  to  quote  the  notable  words  of 
Mr.  Stevens,  the  theory  of  "an  expanded  and 
stimulated  sense  of  resource"  that  comes  with 
technical  training.  As  laid  out  this  training  is 
both  general  and  particular  to  the  stage.  It  deals 
with  pictorial  art,  painting  and  sculpture,  furni- 
ture, architecture,  and  music.  In  subjects  more 
closely  related  to  the  theatre  it  deals  with  cos- 
tume making,  scene  painting,  voice  training,  fenc- 
ing and  dancing,  and  the  business  routine  of  the 
theatre.  This  technical  work  is  continually  in- 
terpreted by  work  of  a  historical  nature  in  the 
history  of  the  theatre,  of  literature,  and  of  folk 
activities. 

All  of  this  lays  the  basis  in  general  culture  and 
personal  equipment  for  the  more  concrete  work  of 


114      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

the  theatre.  When  it  comes  to  this  feature  of  the 
work  the  management  of  the  school  is  fearlessly 
and  explicitly  professional  in  its  leanings.  The 
work  in  rehearsal  and  acting  is  done  by  men  and 
women  who  are  experienced  in  the  professional 
theatre.  Effort  has  always  been  made  to  secure 
as  producers  and  coaches  men  of  a  thorough 
grounding  in  the  tradition  of  the  stage  who  add 
to  this  scholarship  and  imagination.  No  better 
men  could  be  thought  of  for  these  posts  than 
Donald  Robertson,  B.  Iden  Payne,  and  William 
Poel,  all  of  whom  have  been  attached  to  the  thea- 
tre of  the  School  of  Drama  as  producers. 

The  School  of  Drama  is  first  of  all  a  training 
school.  As  such  its  first  fealty  is  to  the  princi- 
ples of  effective  preparation  of  the  students  for 
the  profession  of  the  stage.  But  the  task  has 
been  interpreted  broadly.  In  these  days  when 
the  theatre  is  entering  so  intimately  into  the  life 
of  all  the  people  it  would  be  difficult  for  such  a 
school  not  to  take  its  place  with  them.  This  the 
School  of  Drama  has  done  for  the  Pittsburgh  com- 
munity. Provided  with  the  most  beautiful  little 
theatre  in  America  it  has  been  able  to  offer  with- 
out charge  to  select  groups  of  Pittsburgh  citizens 
plays  new  and  old  that  could  not  possibly  be 
seen  elsewhere  in  productions  of  first  merit.  And 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES       115 

the  audiences  are  selected  altogether  upon  the  in- 
terest evinced.  Anyone  who  really  wishes  to  see 
a  Carnegie  production  has  an  opportunity  to  do 
so.  The  list  of  plays  presented  on  this  stage  is 
distinguished  and  unique.  It  includes  plays  of 
an  academic  interest  either  in  play  or  staging  as 
well  as  examples  of  the  newest  styles  of  stag- 
ing and  play-craftsmanship.  Particular  care  is 
taken  to  encourage  the  attendance  of  students 
from  the  Pittsburgh  schools  in  the  hope  of  foster- 
ing in  this  way  the  most  alert  standards  of  dis- 
crimination in  the  audiences  of  the  future.  The 
School  of  Drama  of  the  Carnegie  Institute  is  a 
distinguished  example  of  what  an  educational  in- 
stitution can  do  for  the  art  of  the  theatre  when 
its  facilities  are  wisely  bent  to  this  end. 

The  movement  for  dramatic  laboratories  has 
extended  outside  the  educational  institutions  and 
has  planted  separate  institutions  in  several  cities 
in  the  country.  As  a  rule  this  has  been  done  by 
those  who  recognized  that  the  way  was  not  yet 
prepared  for  new  theatres  and  that  the  best  serv- 
ice they  could  render  was  in  the  systematic  train- 
ing in  discrimination  and  craftsmanship  of  those 
willing  workers  who  were  coming  into  the  field. 
The  purposes  and  methods  of  these  institutions 


ii6     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

have  not  differed  materially  from  those  I  have 
outlined  for  educational  institutions.  They  have 
called  upon  their  directors  for  a  high  degree  of 
devotion  and  self-sacrifice  and  have  been  ex- 
tremely useful  in  their  communities.  It  is  mani- 
fest that  such  work  as  this,  being  largely  peda- 
gogical, could  not  offer  the  rewards  that  come  from 
work  in  the  theatre. 

The  first  of  these  Workshops  was  that  of  the 
Wisconsin  Players  established  by  Laura  Sherry 
in  Milwaukee  in  1913.  The  activities  of  this 
workshop  are  various,  including  instruction  in 
dancing,  playmaking,  the  rehearsal,  production 
and  criticism  of  plays.  In  1915  this  organiza- 
tion secured  a  building  in  which  are  represented 
many  of  the  interests,  social  and  intellectual,  con- 
nected with  the  theatre,  including  workrooms, 
libraries,  a  book  shop,  and  a  dancing  hall  with 
facilities  for  a  small  theatre.  Miss  Elizabeth 
Bingham  has  executive  direction  of  the  Players' 
Workshop  in  Chicago,  a  laboratory  organization 
which  has  done  excellent  work  in  the  production 
of  new  plays,  the  enlisting  of  players  and  writers 
and  audience  in  that  city.  Though  only  a  year 
old  this  organization  has  already  achieved  some 
notable  results.  The  latest  project  for  a  theatre 
Workshop  is  that  of  Miss  Grace  Griswold  who 


DRAMATIC  LABORATORIES       117 

is  undertaking  to  establish  in  New  York  an  insti- 
tution for  the  purpose  of  centralizing  the  various 
activities  of  the  theatre  somewhat  after  the  fash- 
ion of  the  endowed  scientific  and  economic  foun- 
dations. The  purpose  of  such  an  institution 
would  be  partly  that  of  tuition,  largely  that  of 
research  and  centralization. 


VIII 
THE  CHILDREN'S  THEATRE 

CAN  there  be  a  children's  theatre?  The  answer 
to  this  question  depends  upon  what  one  means  by 
such  an  institution.  If  one  means  by  this  a  de- 
partment of  the  child's  general  education  so  ad- 
justed as  to  involve  the  child's  own  participation, 
using  broadly  the  functions  of  the  dramatic  in 
education  then  my  answer  would  be  that  there 
can  be  a  children's  theatre.  If  on  the  other  hand 
one  means  by  children's  theatre  an  institution  to 
present  plays  of  a  childish  type  to  an  audience 
exclusively  of  young  people,  then  I  should  say 
that  there  cannot  be  a  children's  theatre.  There 
is  no  demand  for  such  a  theatre;  it  would  not  be 
supported,  and  it  would  serve  no  good  purpose. 
Whatever  may  be  the  immediate  excuse  for 
the  existence  of  an  institution,  money  making,  the 
serving  of  a  temporary  need,  the  providing  of  in- 
teresting activity  for  the  workers,  or  the  service 

of  men,  the  continued  existence  of  that  institu- 

118 


THE  CHILDREN'S  THEATRE      119 

tion  goes  back  to  the  satisfaction  of  a  demand.  It 
cannot  exist  unless  it  is  serviceable  and  its  serv- 
iceableness  may  be  measured  by  its  support.  The 
children's  theatre  cannot  exist  unless  there  is  such 
a  thing  as  a  children's  dramatic  art.  I  think  it 
will  be  found  that  this  does  not  exist  any  more 
than  does  a  children's  music  or  a  children's  archi- 
tecture. 

Now  this  does  not  mean  that  there  are  not 
some  plays  that  are  more  appropriate  for  chil- 
dren than  others.  When  these  plays  are  studied 
it  is  found  that  their  adaptability  does  not  come 
from  any  adjustment  to  the  child  mind  but  it 
comes  from  certain  absolute  qualities  in  the  play 
itself.  Truly  considered  a  play  that  is  properly 
adapted  to  children  is  precisely  the  play  that  dis- 
plays the  highest  qualities  of  artistry  for  adults. 
A  children's  theatre  is  any  good  theatre,  and  con- 
versely a  good  theatre  is  a  children's  theatre. 

Now  if  this  were  what  is  meant  by  children's 
theatre  I  would  be  enthusiastic  for  it.  But  this 
is  not  what  is  meant.  A  play  for  children  is 
usually  presumed  to  be  diluted  for  the  childish 
taste,  to  treat  of  childish  themes,  in  a  childish 
psychology,  and  with  a  structure  puerile  and 
half-baked.  Or  it  is  supposed  to  be  a  play  with 
an  easily  discernible  didactic  value.  For  this 


120      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

kind  of  thing  there  is  no  demand  and  no  sup- 
port. 

In  an  half  dozen  years  a  score  of  children's 
theatres  have  been  announced.  All  started  with 
pleasant  plans,  and  some  with  sufficient  money. 
Yet  none  has  succeeded.  In  1912  a  Children's 
Theatre  was  established  by  Mrs.  Georgia  Wolfe 
in  the  Carnegie  Lyceum  in  New  York  playing 
sketches  from  Dickens.  Under  the  auspices  of 
the  Recreation  League  of  San  Francisco  a  chil- 
dren's theatre  was  established  in  the  same  year 
by  Mrs.  D.  E.  F.  Easton,  the  admission  fee  be- 
ing set  at  ten  cents.  In  1913  a  juvenile  theatre 
was  announced  for  Los  Angeles  to  cost  $160,000. 
The  entire  theatre  was  to  be  in  the  hands  of  the 
children,  the  little  ones  being  expected  to  write, 
to  act,  and  to  stage  the  plays.  The  next  year 
a  children's  motion  picture  theatre  was  announced 
for  the  same  city.  In  1913  the  Washington  Cen- 
tre of  the  Drama  League  announced  the  House  of 
Play,  a  little  theatre  to  seat  400  children.  San 
Francisco  again  came  forward  with  a  project  in 
1915,  the  players  to  be  drawn  from  the  theatres 
and  dramatic  clubs  of  the  city.  In  1916  the 
Drama  League  proposed  to  establish  a  children's 
theatre  in  Chicago  with  performances  on  Satur- 
day mornings  at  a  charge  of  ten  cents.  In  the 


THE  CHILDREN'S  THEATRE      121 

same  year  the  Children's  Playhouse  was  estab- 
lished in  Columbus,  Ohio,  under  the  conduct  of 
the  Public  Recreation  Commission.  In  the  holi- 
days of  1916  Mrs.  Alice  Herts-Heniger,  Miss 
Katherine  Lord  and  Mrs.  Mary  Austin  arranged 
for  a  series  of  matinees  for  children  at  a  down 
town  theatre  in  New  York  in  a  production  of  one 
of  Mrs.  Austin's  plays.  It  is  apparent  that  the 
matter  of  a  children's  theatre  has  been  much  can- 
vassed yet  none  of  these  undertakings  went  be- 
yond the  announcement  stage  or  at  best  the  first 
production. 

The  efforts  for  a  children's  theatre  were  not 
left  entirely  to  outside  experimenters.  Profes- 
sional managers  took  up  the  idea  and  spent  some 
thought  and  money  on  the  experiment.  The 
most  successful  children's  play  given  in  New 
York  City  has  been  Winthrop  Ames's  production 
of  "Snow  White"  given  for  92  performances  at 
the  Little  Theatre  in  the  fall  of  1912.  David 
Belasco  secured  "A  Good  Little  Devil"  adapted 
from  the  work  of  Mme.  Edmond  Rostand  and  her 
son  for  a  few  performances.  W.  A.  Brady  gave  a 
beautiful  production  to  "Little  Women."  None 
of  these  uncovered  a  demand  on  the  part  of 
audiences.  The  most  costly  venture  of  all  was 
the  Children's  Theatre  undertaken  by  George  C. 


122     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Tyler  on  the  roof  of  the  Century  Theatre,  form- 
erly the  New  Theatre,  on  funds  provided  by  W. 
K.  Vanderbilt.  A  theatre  seating  800  was  built 
in  the  open  air  on  the  roof.  It  was  beautifully 
arranged  and  charmingly  decorated.  The  designs 
were  all  of  a  nature  that  would  presumably  ap- 
peal to  the  childish  fancy.  Boxes  were  named 
"Beauty  and  the  Beast,"  "The  House  that  Jack 
Built,"  etc.  The  programme  was  pictured  from 
fairy  tales  and  fables. 

The  theatre  opened  at  a  private  performance 
December  21,  1912,  and  to  the  public  the  fol- 
lowing Monday  in  "Rackety-Packety  House"  by 
Mrs.  Frances  Hodgson  Burnett.  Everything 
possible  was  done  to  reach  the  attention  of  the 
children  and  the  approval  of  their  elders.  Yet 
the  theatre  never  played  to  any  business  of  im- 
portance, the  attendance  seldom  rising  above  300. 
According  to  the  director  it  was  the  most  dis- 
spiriting  undertaking  of  his  life.  After  a  few 
weeks  the  Children's  Theatre  was  made  over  into 
a  restaurant. 

Among  those  theatres  which  have  made  it  a 
point  to  appeal  to  children  and  have  made  any 
success  of  the  appeal  the  greater  number  have 
been  theatres  that  made  the  appeal  incidentally 
to  other  purposes,  in  which  the  general  spirit  of 


THE  CHILDREN'S  THEATRE      123 

the  theatre  is  of  a  nature  to  appeal  to  the  child- 
like joy  of  men  and  women  as  well  as  of  young 
people.  Such  was  the  temper  of  the  Bijou  Thea- 
tre in  Boston,  an  advanced  motion  picture  theatre 
which  offered  a  programme  of  pictures,  travel 
chats,  and  folk  songs.  This  theatre  was  under- 
taken by  Mrs.  Josephine  Clement  in  1908  and 
ran  for  six  years.  The  Neighborhood  Playhouse 
in  New  York  has  made  a  success  in  its  offerings  to 
children  on  account  of  the  fact  that  the  spirit 
of  the  theatre  is  always  that  of  a  festival.  And 
Stuart  Walker  has  drawn  a  juvenile  audience  on 
account  of  the  joyo.us  and  unsophisticated  plays 
he  has  presented.  Too  many  managers  have  ap- 
pealed to  children  in  a  spirit  of  patronage  which 
the  child  is  most  ready  to  discover  and  to  re- 
sent. The  plays  which  have  best  succeeded  with 
children  have  been  those  which  were  written  for 
the  mature  intelligences  of  men  and  women  as 
these  rise  to  the  levels  of  the  childlike.  "The 
Blue  Bird"  and  "Peter  Pan,"  to  mention  the 
plays  which  come  first  to  mind,  are  plays  for 
men  and  women.  Only  men  and  women  can  truly 
appreciate  the  exquisite  delicacy  and  perfect 
technique  they  display.  And  they  were  favorites 
with  children.  The  child's  mind  does  not  differ 
from  that  of  the  adult.  In  many  respects  he  is 


124     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

a  better  judge  for  he  has  not  schooled  himself, 
as  have  too  many  of  his  elders,  in  the  council  of 
bad  works.  He  is  not  ready  to  accept  an  apology 
or  to  grant  an  insult  to  his  intelligence.  For  this 
reason  Shakespeare  is  always  a  favorite  with  the 
young. 

There  remain  for  consideration  two  organiza- 
tions which  while  not  children's  theatres  have  been 
very  useful  in  fostering  the  dramatic  impulses  of 
childhood.  Both  of  these  approach  the  subject 
from  the  ground  of  the  school  rather  than  of  the 
theatre.  It  is  probable  that  when  the  matter  is 
sifted  down  it  will  be  found  that  the  real  call  for 
the  children's  theatre  comes  from  those  who  are 
interested  in  education  rather  than  the  art  of 
the  theatre.  The  distinction  between  the  chil- 
dren's theatre  and  the  use  of  the  dramatic  facul- 
ties in  education  should  be  clearly  drawn.  The 
first  raises  questions  of  entertainment  and  art  and 
its  values  are  presumably  absolute.  The  second 
is  a  question  of  mental  development  and  its  values 
are  relative.  We  are  quite  willing  to  grant  a 
place  to  drama  in  education  without  granting  a 
place  to  the  children's  theatre  in  the  catalogue  of 
the  arts  of  the  stage.  Education  is  premised  to 
the  mind  of  the  young.  It  is  fitting  that  it  should 
use  and  develop  all  the  latent  forces  of  the  young 


THE  CHILDREN'S  THEATRE     125 

mind,  and  so  manipulate  its  materials  as  to  be 
most  useful  for  this  purpose.  This  the  theatre 
cannot  do  without  confusing  its  purposes.  It  can- 
not obey  the  behest  of  truth  and  at  the  same  time 
the  behest  of  pedagogical  method.  By  the  sim- 
ple operation  of  natural  law  the  matter  works 
out  satisfactorily.  Young  people  enjoy  their 
work  in  drama  for  education.  They  do  not  en- 
joy the  purposed  entertainments  of  the  children's 
theatre. 

In  1902  there  was  established  by  the  Educa- 
tional Alliance  of  New  York  City  a  department 
of  dramatic  activity  under  the  direction  of  Miss 
A.  Minnie  Herts  and  Mrs.  Emma  Sheridan  Fry. 
The  purposes  of  this  work  were  the  utilization 
of  the  dramatic  faculties  in  the  education  of 
young  people  particularly  of  foreign  races.  The 
work  went  on  for  seven  years  during  which  time 
"Snow  White,"  "Ingomar,"  "As  You  Like  It," 
"The  Tempest"  and  a  dozen  other  plays  were 
presented.  Then  in  1909  the  work  was  discon- 
tinued for  lack  of  support. 

Out  of  this  early  work  of  the  Educational  Al- 
liance there  came  two  movements  in  children's 
dramatics.  The  Children's  Educational  Theatre 
was  under  the  direction  of  Mrs.  Minnie  Herts- 
Heniger  and  the  Educational  Dramatic  League 


126     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

was  for  some  time  instructed  by  Mrs.  Emma 
Sheridan  Fry.  In  neither  organization  is  the  pur- 
pose primarily  one  for  the  improvement  of  the 
theatre.  The  primary  purpose  is  the  use  of  the 
drama  as  an  instrument  in  social  and  educational 
work.  Of  the  Children's  Educational  Theatre 
Mark  Twain  said,  "I  consider  the  Children's  Edu- 
cational Theatre  the  greatest  citizen-making  force 
of  the  century.  I  hope  I  may  live  to  see  it  firmly 
established."  In  taking  the  Stuyvesant  Fish 
House  as  the  center  of  its  activities  the  purpose 
of  the  Educational  Theatre  was  to  utilize  the 
largest  number  of  children  possible  in  the  produc- 
tion of  each  play,  and  to  place  the  complete  pro- 
duction within  the  reach  of  thousands.  The 
Children's  Educational  Theatre  was  chartered  in 
December,  1912.  Though  primarily  for  an  edu- 
cational purpose  its  importance  to  the  theatre  is 
not  slight,  through  its  influence  in  making  chil- 
dren responsible  for  the  standards  of  their  own  en- 
tertainment. 

Also  an  institution  of  education  through  drama 
the  Educational  Dramatic  League  has  operated 
largely  upon  principles  of  system  and  organiza- 
tion. Its  purpose  has  been  to  formulate  and 
standardize  the  already  broad  practice  of  dra- 
matics in  education.  No  longer  is  there  question 


THE  CHILDREN'S  THEATRE      127 

as  to  the  broad  place  that  drama  takes  in  the  tui- 
tion of  youth.  The  need  now  is  for  more  expert- 
ness  and  a  better  system.  For  this  reason  efforts 
have  been  put  forth  so  to  broaden  the  work  of  the 
League  as  to  cover  the  activities  in  clubs  and 
schools  and  recreation  centers  in  New  York  City 
and  in  the  state.  Fostered  first  by  the  People's 
Institute  strength  was  given  to  this  work  when 
Mrs.  Eleanor  Robson  Belmont  joined  it. 

It  is  not  so  much  the  purpose  of  the  Educational 
Dramatic  League  to  present  plays  as  to  work  out 
a  systematic  machinery  by  which  those  in  charge 
of  the  presentation  of  plays  shall  be  instructed 
and  guided.  At  present  there  is  an  informal 
working  arrangement  with  the  Board  of  Education 
and  with  those  in  charge  of  the  recreational  activi- 
ties of  the  city  of  New  York  to  bring  all  the 
dramatic  forces  in  their  charge  under  one  respon- 
sible administration.  The  time  is  confidently 
looked  forward  to  when  this  relationship  will  be 
even  more  close  and  efficient. 

Though  these  activities  are  aside  from  the  cen- 
tral purposes  of  the  theatre,  and  therefore  aside 
from  the  scope  of  this  book,  one  cannot  avoid 
recognizing  their  real  potential  importance  to  the 
theatre. 


IX 
PIONEERS 

SOME  years  ago  the  Frohman  offices  made  a  sur- 
vey of  their  audiences  and  found  that  women  made 
up  about  seventy  percent,  of  the  entire  attendance 
upon  their  productions.  These  figures  have  been 
referred  to  as  explaining  the  prominent  place 
women  have  taken  in  the  recent  movements  of  the 
theatre.  But  the  interest  of  women  in  the  new 
movements  has  been  more  than  one  of  histrionics. 
The  theatre  provided  them  an  outlet  for  their 
peculiar  genius.  Some  years  back  they  had  turned 
by  the  hundreds  from  women's  clubs  to  the  more 
concrete  work  of  political,  social,  and  economic 
bureaus.  And  now  the  theatre  opened  a  still 
wider  horizon. 

And  it  was  well  that  it  was  so.  Women  have 
that  combination  of  vision,  faith  and  inexperience 
which  was  necessary  in  the  theatre  at  the  time. 
Do  I  mean  that  inexperience  in  the  theatre  was 
necessary?  Precisely.  Without  a  plentiful  fund 

of  inexperience,  without  the  daring  that  comes 

128 


PIONEERS  129 

from  ignorance  of  what  was  in  store  for  one  no 
person  five  years  ago  would  have  undertaken  the 
founding  of  a  new  theatre  on  radical  plans.  The 
experienced  man  of  the  theatre  knows  that  the 
path  of  even  the  established  theatre  is  full  of 
dangers.  The  innovating  theji£rje_jmeans  almost 


certain  disastgn "Toundertake  work  in  it  inex- 
perience was  necessary  and  along  with  women's 
positive  gifts  of  vision  and  skill  they  were  sup- 
plied as  a  rule  with  this  negative  advantage  as 
well. 

Inexperience  was  both  the  cause  and  the  curse 
of  these  first  ventures.  The  real  lesson  one  learns 
from  them  is  that  the  lessons  of  the  theatre  have 
to  be  conned  whether  one  expects  to  run  an  art 
theatre  or  a  variety  house,  an  Empire,  a  Hippo- 
drome, or  a  Toy  Theatre.  These  early  experi- 
ments forever  dissipated  the  idea  that  there  can 
be  two  kinds  of  theatres,  the  theatre  that  appeals 
and  the  theatre  that  presents.  All  theatres  must 
appeal,  the  small  as  well  as  the  large.  The  faith 
in  the  absolute  art  principle  by  which  many 
young  producers  started  out,  the  belief  that  the 
art  can  achieve  its  own  support  without  recourse 
to  the  showman's  aid,  was  born  of  inexperience, 
nothing  less.  It  seems  cruel  to  say  so  in  view 
of  high  protestations.  But  this  is  a  point  we 


130     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

cannot  get  too  clearly  in  mind.  An  indispensable 
part  of  the  work  of  the  theatre  is  that  of  the  show- 
man. Boggle  the  fact  as  we  may  no  theatre  can 
get  along  if  it  has  not  this  gift  behind  it. 

What  are  the  marks  of  the  showman?  All 
great  dramatists  and  men  of  the  theatre  are  show- 
men. I  am  almost  willing  to  say  that  all  great 
artists  are  showmen.  I  am  sure  that  all  small 
and  successful  artists  whether  in  the  theatre  or 
out  are  showmen.  The  great  are  showmen  plus. 
The  small  are  only  showmen.  The  showman's 
gift  is  partly  the  ability  to  make  things  "stand 
out,"  to  "display"  them.  Partly  it  is  the  ability 
to  speak  in  terms  that  reach  common  understand- 
ing. Partly  it  is  ability  in  the  organization  of 
the  materials  of  the  art  for  its  ideal  purpose.  As 
it  enters  into  all  art  it  is  that  trait  of  verve,  apart 
from  craftsmanship,  by  which  a  Gainsborough  is 
recognized  from  his  imitator.  Sometimes  it  is 
called  "plunge."  The  theatre  calls  it  "punch" 
and  "pep."  These  are  not  bad  words.  They 
stand  for  a  true  principle  in  art  that  the  artist  al- 
ways recognizes  though  he  may  not  know  how  to 
define  it. 

How  much  this  principle  is  subject  to  abuse  in 
the  theatre  we  all  know.  It  is  closely  allied  to 
charlatanism,  to  the  baser  and  more  vulgar  ap- 


PIONEERS  131 

peals.  There  is  no  art  in  which  this  necessary 
principle  of  all  art  can  be  so  used  to  the  distress 
of  the  true  artist.  Confounding  its  abuse  with 
the  principle  itself,  the  methods  of  a  Barnum 
with  the  human  cry  of  "panem  et  circenses"  some 
have  thought  that  they  could  make  a  theatre  on 
a  rigorous  basis  apart  from  the  lure  of  the  show- 
man. And  they  have  failed.  I  think  it  is  safe 
to  say  that  the  handling  of  this  gift  itself  provides 
a  test  of  the  fibre  of  the  artist.  Not  that  he  shall 
weakly  discard  it  but  that  he  shall  use  it  with 
masterful  self  control  is  the  requirement. 

One  of  these  qualities  of  the  showman  has  a 
peculiar  importance  in  the  theatre.  It  is  the  one 
that  has  to  do  with  the  organization  of  the  ma- 
terials of  art  for  ideal  purposes.  The  showman 
not  only  has  to  make  things  stand  out,  and  speak 
a  recognizable  language.  He  has  to  be  a  business 
man,  an  artist  executive.  He  has  to  be  acquainted 
with  the  technique  of  the  theatre,  to  know  how  to 
handle  the  factors  of  a  production.  He  has  to 
know  how  to  keep  all  his  forces  in  line  and  in 
proper  balance,  to  encourage  and  yet  curb  en- 
thusiasm, to  keep  the  spring  of  creative  impulse 
alive  at  the  same  time  that  he  is  subjecting  it 
to  an  audit  system  of  expense.  There  is  no  kind 
of  theatrical  company  of  any  description,  high  or 


132     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

low,  in  which  this  gift  is  not  necessary.  It  was 
too  much  to  expect  this  system  to  work  in  new 
companies  made  up  of  volunteer  workers,  doing 
they  knew  not  what  and  subject  to  the  gusts  of 
temperament  not  uncommon  in  the  theatre.  But 
to  the  extent  that  this  could  not  be  secured  fail- 
ure was  inevitable. 

Lately  there  has  been  some  disposition  to  as- 
sume the  intellectual  glories  of  Boston  to  be 
those  of  the  past.  Lest  I  seem  to  fall  into  this 
error  let  me  say  that  Boston  is  still  the  intellectual 
capital  of  America.  And  if  Boston  is  Athens  then 
Massachusetts,  Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island  are 
Attica.  Not  the  least  interesting  feature  of  the 
life  of  this  district  has  been  the  persistence  in  good 
standing  of  the  social  dramatic  club.  The  Cam- 
bridge Social  Dramatic  Club,  twenty-seven  years 
old,  The  Footlights  Club  of  Jamaica  Plain,  the 
Brookline  Amateurs,  the  Players  of  Newton,  the 
famous  old  Talma  Club  of  Providence,  with  a 
long  history  of  excellent  productions  and  a  theatre 
of  its  own,  all  these  had  entered  into  the  life  of 
the  community.  The  amateur  was  not  as  despised 
on  the  seaboard  as  elsewhere.  Plays  were  well 
presented,  the  training  was  thorough  and  expert, 
in  each  club  there  developed  corps  of  actors  in 


PIONEERS  133 

private  life  who  had  a  professional  accuracy  in 
method. 

In  this  atmosphere  Mrs.  Lyman  W.  Gale  had 
been  reared.  She  had  herself  taken  a  part  in 
amateur  dramatics  at  Weston,  Massachusetts. 
With  her  colleagues  the  new  trends  in  things 
theatrical  had  pointed  her  mind  to  more  particular 
problems.  In  1911  she  came  under  the  influence 
of  the  Irish  Players  who  had  had  a  season  in 
Boston.  Lately  she  had  been  left  a  sum  of 
money.  And  so  she  determined  to  establish  a 
theatre. 

I  am  not  going  to  try  to  tell  the  intimate  his- 
tory of  the  Toy  Theatre  of  Boston.  No  one 
knows  this  fully  with  the  exception  of  Mrs.  Gale. 
But  I  am  going  to  find  it  desirable  to  speak  of 
it  specifically,  and  not  to  hesitate  in  drawing  con- 
clusions from  its  very  interesting  career.  Mrs. 
Gale  was  so  truly  the  mother  of  the  theatre,  it 
reflected  her  own  spirit  and  equipment  so  com- 
pletely, that  I  am  going  to  try  to  deal  with  it  in 
terms  of  her  own  ideals,  disillusionments  and  dis- 
appointments. In  these  more  than  in  anything 
else  are  the  true  problems,  many  of  them  quite  in- 
soluble, of  pioneering  work  in  the  theatre  re- 
vealed. 

As  the  idea  of  a  little  theatre  rested  on  Mrs. 


134     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Gale's  mind  it  was  to  be  simple,  honest,  a  return 
to  the  rudimentary  principles  of  stage  practice. 
The  theatre  was  to  be  based  upon  the  ideal  of  co- 
operation among  all  the  workers,  and  its  conduct 
was  as  nearly  as  possible  to  be  gauged  to  the  de- 
mands and  to  the  return.  In  order  to  support 
the  theatre  in  its  early  days  generous  subscriptions 
were  secured  from  a  small  circle.  An  old  stable 
was  taken  at  16  Lime  Street  and  this  was  re- 
modelled as  a  theatre  seating  129  persons.  The 
theatre  was  named  the  Toy  Theatre.  One  hears 
suggestions  that  this  first  theatre  was  a  socially 
exclusive  institution.  This  was  not  Mrs.  Gale's 
intention.  She  desired  to  secure  support  from 
sympathetic  people.  As  it  chanced  this  came 
first  from  people  of  means  and  leisure.  But  she 
had  no  intention  of  making  the  theatre  in  any 
way  a  class  institution. 

One  of  the  first  measures  necessary  was  to  se- 
cure a  corps  of  working  members  of  interests  sym- 
pathetic with  those  of  the  theatre.  How  to  get 
that  proper  combination  of  centralization  and  ad- 
visory control,  of  the  free  initiative  necessary  and 
yet  the  wide  support  no  less  necessary  was  a  prob- 
lem. It  was  not  made  easier  by  the  fact  that 
there  are  as  many  minds  as  men  in  the  remaking 
of  the  theatre  and  the  director  had  come  into  her 


PIONEERS  135 

work  more  expecting  to  experiment  than  with 
settled  plans  to  execute.  The  first  result  of  these 
conditions  was  a  failure  to  secure  in  Boston  a  rep- 
resentative committee  which  would  stand  with 
the  director  before  the  city.  In  large  measure 
Mrs.  Gale  was  compelled  to  stand  alone. 

Some  principles  stood  out  clearly.  The  work 
was  to  be  cooperative  and  uncompensated ;  the 
venture  was  to  pay  for  itself  as  it  went  along; 
it  should  depend  upon  and  create  a  settled 
audience;  it  was  to  represent  new  plays  and  as 
far  as  possible  tend  to  American  plays;  produc- 
tions were  to  be  simple.  For  the  carrying  on  of 
this  programme  an  amateur  company  was  gath- 
ered together,  subscriptions  were  called  for,  the 
assistance  of  artists  and  craftsmen  was  enlisted. 
Arrangements  were  made  for  playing  only  three 
times  a  week,  for  subscribers,  for  the  general  pub- 
lic and  for  students.  So  successful  was  the  pro- 
gramme that  in  spite  of  all  drawbacks  the  Toy 
Theatre  ran  for  three  years  in  its  Lime  Street 
House  and  covered  expenses. 

Now  we  have  to  consider  how  unforeseen  cir- 
cumstances entered  into  the  tale  of  the  theatre. 
It  is  the  business  of  the  theatre  to  call  upon  the 
best  artists  and  craftsmen  in  their  respective  pro- 
fessions and  to  create  an  art  out  of  their  coopera- 


136     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

tive  powers.  Boston  had  in  Livingston  Platt  an 
eye  and  hand  and  constructive  brain.  He  had 
had  some  experience  with  little  theatres  in  Spain 
and  in  Bruges  but  so  far  his  gifts  had  not  been 
turned  to  the  service  of  the  theatre  in  America. 
Naturally  enough  such  a  gift  as  his  had  to  be 
used,  and  if  there  was  not  a  place  for  it  in  the 
scheme  as  outlined  a  place  had  to  be  made.  The 
theatre  must  make  a  way  for  the  strongest  new 
motives  or  the  theatre  will  fail.  With  Living- 
ston Platt  there  came  into  the  Toy  Theatre  a  force 
that  more  than  any  other  gave  it  national  note. 
The  fact  remains  that  the  little  theatre  had  not 
been  built  for  that  force.  The  artistic  influences 
were  too  emphatic  and  the  expense  was  too  great. 
Eventually  this  force  gave  the  whole  theatre  a 
bent  away  from  the  modest  and  rudimentary 
service  it  was  expected  to  render. 

Partly  as  a  result  of  this  accession  to  its  forces 
the  little  theatre  in  Lime  Street  began  to  prosper. 
Here  entered  the  second  conflicting  element  in  its 
history,  an  element  that  finally  confounded  it. 
The  manager  of  a  theatre  has  to  handle  two  sets 
of  intractable  instruments.  The  first  are  artists 
who  are  likely  to  be  blind  to  every  call  but  their 
own.  The  second  are  men  of  a  colder  and  more 
calculating  type,  the  men  who  whisper  the  broader 


PIONEERS  137 

utility  values  of  enterprises  and  who  fortify  their 
suggestions  with  all  manner  of  high-sounding  rea- 
sons. It  did  not  take  the  latter  class  long  to  dis- 
cover the  Toy  Theatre,  and  from  them  soon  came 
the  suggestion  that  a  new  theatre  building  would 
be  advantageous. 

Now  no  one  can  blame  the  business  wit  that 
saw  in  the  Toy  Theatre  an  opportunity  for  an- 
other profitable  investment.  The  directors  of 
the  theatre  were  not  compelled  to  take  the  hint. 
But  there  is  a  weak  point  in  the  armor  of  most 
idealists  of  the  theatre.  In  one  it  is  the  call  to 
be  seen  in  New  York.  In  another  it  is  the  temp- 
tation to  combine  in  one  person  the  arts  of  actor, 
author  and  producer.  The  weak  point  in  the 
armor  of  the  Toy  Theatre  was  ^theciieare  tor  a 
building.  There  resulted  a  house  seating  595 
persons  and  situated  on  the  well-travelled  Copley 
Square.  I  am  not  going  to  question  the  motives 
that  entered  into  the  building  of  this  theatre. 
Certain  it  is  that  the  change  meant  a  shifting  of 
values  and  a  loss  of  all  that  the  experiment  had 
represented.  The  theatre  was  undertaken  at  a 
moment  in  which  the  clear  ideals  of  the  past  had 
become  hazy.  It  represented  in  fact  another  busi- 
ness venture  attaching  itself  to  the  fledgling  wings 
of  a  little  experimental  theatre.  When  it  didn't 


138      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

pay  as  a  little  theatre  it  was  necessary  to  find 
means  to  make  it  pay. 

From  this  time  on  the  story  can  be  quickly 
told.  Conditions  were  absolutely  set  against  the 
little  venture.  It  was  confronted  with  those  de- 
lays in  building  and  interferences  on  the  part  of 
the  law  that  the  commercial  manager  knows  how 
to  handle  but  are  fatal  to  the  novice.  The  best 
months  of  the  season  were  lost  waiting  for  a  build- 
ing. A  full  rental  of  $12,000  was  paid  for  what 
amounted  to  the  tag  ends  of  two  seasons.  Now  it 
came  to  be  a  matter  no  longer  of  trying  to  repre- 
sent ideals  but  of  frantic  effort  to  find  some  way 
to  pay  the  rent.  The  amateur  company  was  no 
longer  to  be  considered.  So  the  "professionals" 
were  turned  to,  the  only  professionals  who  could 
be  secured  for  dubious  ventures,  those  excellent 
persons  who  themselves  have  an  axe  of  ambition 
or  of  innovation  to  grind.  Some  good  things 
were  done  but  not  one  of  them  was  a  success  and 
each  venture  only  the  further  loaded  the  manage- 
ment with  debt.  Promptly  as  the  clock  struck 
at  the  end  of  the  patch-work  season  the  theatre 
was  taken  over  by  the  owner  and  given  to  the 
movies.  The  director  had  lost  $20,000;  others 
had  lost  unguessed  amounts.  In  1916  the  theatre 
became  the  Copley  Square  and  was  the  scene  of 


PIONEERS  139 

Henry  Jewett's  interesting  experiment  in  stock  in 
a  repertory  of  English  plays. 

So  ended  the  career  of  this  first  little  theatre, 
a  notable  and  most  instructive  experiment  in  a 
new  field.  Its  list  of  plays  was  not  distinguished. 
Few  new  American  plays  of  value  were  uncovered. 
The  enterprise  displayed  some  of  the  frailer  char- 
acteristics of  idealism,  the  characteristics  that 
make  this  respectable  term  somewhat  suspicious  to 
the  eyes  of  practical  men,  bearing  out  the  idea 
that  idealism  is  so-called  only  as  long  as  it  doesn't 
work.  As  soon  as  it  begins  to  succeed  it  is  no 
longer  idealism.  The  whole  venture  gives  the 
effect  of  the  confusion  of  inexperience.  Having 
said  this  one  must  say  also  that  it  was  absolutely 
inevitable  that  the  venture  should  have  displayed 
all  these  things.  The  director  had  against  her 
not  only  her  own  lack  of  knowledge  but  the  gen- 
eral misunderstanding  that  surrounds  the  ven- 
turesome thing.  Managerial  control  of  diverse 
forces,  a  mind  keenly  set  on  the  important  ends, 
strong  in  discarding  false  methods  and  tempta- 
tions, were  too  much  to  expect  in  the  earliest  days 
of  new  theatrical  enterprise.  It  needs  to  be  re- 
membered for  Mrs.  Gale  not  only  that  she  blazed 
a  path  but  that  her  plan  was  right.  If  she  was 
unfortunate  it  was  in  its  execution  and  not  in  its 


HO      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

design  and  the  execution  lay  largely  outside  of 
the  control  of  any  man  or  woman. 

For  several  years  Philadelphia  has  been  vigor- 
ously claiming  the  credit  of  being  the  cradle  of 
the  American  drama.  Whether  this  be  true  or 
not  it  can  at  any  rate  safely  be  said  that  Philadel- 
phia is  the  home  of  the  first  little  theatre  that  has 
weathered  all  storms  and  persists  up  to  this  day. 
Even  in  this  Boston  has  its  share,  for  Mrs.  Harriet 
Jay  was  a  Boston  woman  before  she  went  to 
Philadelphia  in  1911  to  establish  the  Metropolitan 
Dramatic  School.  Two  years  later  by  the  assist- 
ance of  Mr.  F.  H.  Shelton  she  built  the  Little 
Theatre  in  Delancey  Street,  near  lyth,  seating 
330  people.  The  theatre  was  opened  March  3, 


From  that  day  to  this  the  Little  Theatre  of 
Philadelphia  has  travelled  a  devious  and  difficult 
course.  Changing  form  several  times,  many  times 
on  the  point  of  closing,  it  has  always  managed  to 
come  out  "right  side  up  with  care"  at  the  end. 
There  is  one  page  in  the  record  of  this  theatre  I 
am  not  able  to  write.  That  page  is  budget. 
Without  knowing  how  much  money  has  been  lost 
I  cannot  satisfactorily  interpret  the  facts  before 
me.  But  all  the  evidences  point  to  the  suspicion 


PIONEERS  141 

that  this  has  been  a  rather  costly  venture.  Some 
of  the  facts  I  shall  bring  up  may  strengthen  this 
suspicion  by  revealing  the  evidences  upon  which 
it  is  based. 

In  the  first  place  the  Little  Theatre  of  Phil- 
adelphia is  not  strictly  a  little  theatre  in  the  sense 
in  which  I  expounded  this  term  in  the  chapter  on 
"The  Little  Theatre."  It  lies  somewhere  between 
the  little  theatre  and  the  professional  theatre.  It 
is  a  little  theatre  in  size  and  in  a  certain  freshness 
of  appeal.  It  is  not  a  little  theatre  in  the  sense 
of  reducing  the  machinery  of  production  to  the 
lowest  terms.  It  has  always  tried  to  play  every 
night  in  the  week;  it  has  usually  had  a  paid  com- 
pany; its  settings  are  expensive;  it  has  had  high- 
priced  producers ;  it  has  paid  royalty  for  many  of 
its  plays.  Evidently  this  theatre  comes  nearer 
to  the  system  of  Miss  Horniman's  company  in 
Manchester  than  to  the  touch-and-go  systems  of 
the  little  theatres. 

Now  these  things  provide  the  difference  between 
the  heavy  and  sometimes  prohibitive  expenses  of 
professional  companies  and  the  scant  financial 
programmes  of  the  amateur  experimenters.  And 
this  difference  usually  amounts  to  the  difference 
between  keeping  the  theatre  open  and  closing  it, 
for  with  an  innovating  run  of  plays  there  is  not 


142      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

usually  available  an  audience  large  enough  to 
support  the  higher-priced  system.  That  audiences 
at  the  Little  Theatre  have  not  been  sufficient  to 
support  this  professional  scale  is  made  clear  by 
the  frequent  public  crises  through  which  the 
theatre  has  passed. 

Other  evidences  of  the  same  thing  are  drawn 
from  the  nature  of  the  repertory  of  the  theatre. 
Far  too  large  a  share  of  the  energy  of  the  Little 
Theatre  has  been  expended  in  trying  to  find  oat 
what  the  public  wants,  and  too  small  a  share 
has  been  given  to  building  up  a  consistent  policy. 
This  the  theatre  quite  lacks.  If  there  is  any  policy 
it  differs  hardly  at  all  from  that  of  the  commercial 
theatre  in  trying  to  learn  how  best  to  purvey  to 
the  audience  that  supports  it.  This  has  given 
an  air  of  confusion  and  the  haphazard  to  the 
work  of  the  theatre. 

In  laying  out  their  repertory  the  directors  of 
the  theatre  have  been  subject  to  "influences"  and 
these  usually  the  influences  of  policy  borrowed 
from  the  commercial  manager.  The  theatre 
opened  with  a  shocker  and  even  the  unfortunate 
experience  with  this  play  has  not  entirely  con- 
vinced the  management  that  the  shocker  is  not 
a  business  getter.  Examples  of  plays  have  been 
borrowed  from  every  school  and  from  every  move- 


PIONEERS  143 

ment.  No  new  American  play  of  any  distinc- 
tion has  been  discovered.  As  a  final  recourse  the 
theatre  has  fallen  back  on  Shaw.  Now,  while 
Shaw  may  still  be  the  dramatist,  of  the  highbrows 
he  no  longer  demands  courage.  He  is  even  a 
little  trite.  The  one  requirement  of  the  little 
theatre  is  the  piquing  of  interest,  the  startling  of 
attention  by  a  continual  exercise  of  fancy.  On 
account  of  the  system  upon  which  it  has  run  the 
Philadelphia  Little  Theatre  couldn't  do  that  and 
so  it  turns  from  shockers  and  scandal  plays  to  the 
safety  of  Shaw. 

In  pursuit  of  the  fickle  audience  some  really 
excellent  measures  have  been  taken  in  the  engage- 
ment of  good  actors  and  producers.  Among  the 
visiting  companies  in  this  theatre  have  been  Annie 
Russell's  company  in  the  old  comedies,  the 
Theatre  Frangais  d'Amerique,  the  German  Stock 
Company  from  the  Irving  Place  Theatre,  and  the 
Washington  Square  Players.  Among  the  pro- 
ducers have  been  Frank  Reicher  and  B.  Iden 
Payney^  Among  the  actors  have  been  a  dozen  or 
more  of  national  reputation.  But  because  the 
theatre  lacked  a  settled  policy,  or  because  it  has 
never  held  to  a  temporary  policy  long  enough  to 
give  it  a  fair  trial  few  of  these  have  entered  into 
the  substance  of  the  institution. 


144     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

These  conditions  are  reflected  in  the  audience. 
This  displays  few  marks  of  difference  from  the 
strange  nonplussed  beast  forever  ridden  by  the 
professional  theatre.  Though  a  subscription  sys- 
tem is  used  by  the  Little  Theatre  no  specific 
audience  has  been  found.  The  theatre  still  ap- 
peals by  broadsides  and  general  advertising  to  the 
mass  of  Philadelphia's  population.  A  city  of  two 
millions  is  canvassed  regularly  to  fill  a  little  build- 
ing seating  about  three  hundred.  Aside  from  the 
expensiveness  of  this  arrangement  the  Little 
Theatre  is  missing  a  great  opportunity  to  bind 
to  itself  a  specific  audience,  selecting  itself  out 
from  the  population  by  its  approval  of  the  aims 
and  methods  of  the  theatre. 

To  me  the  Little  Theatre  of  Philadelphia  has 
the  appearance  of  a  little  theatre  that  is  ashamed 
of  its  class.  Ensconced  in  a  small  building  it  has 
tried  to  live  up  to  the  dignities  of  a  stock  com- 
pany. In  the  attempt  it  has  found  itself  bur- 
dened not  only  with  the  expenses  of  the  commer- 
cial theatre  but  with  the  added  loads  that  belong 
to  the  innovator.  An  almost  unbelievable  in- 
dustry has  been  put  into  its  work.  Nothing  but 
blind  devotion  to  her  cause  would  have  kept  the 
director  so  consistently  at  work  during  five  sea- 
sons. But  unless  I  am  mistaken  she  will  have  to 


PIONEERS  145 

clarify  either  her  theories  or  her  practice  in  some 
important  respects  before  her  theatre  can  be  con- 
sidered a  success. 


In  a  system  in  which  inexperience  and  indeci- 
sion are  likely  to  be  qualifications  for  leadership 
it  is  grateful  to  the  critic  to  find  a  man  who  bases 
his  work  upon  rigorous  ideas.  I  cannot  find  that 
Maurice  Browne's  association  with  the  theatre  has 
been  close.  I  do  find  that  he  has  known  what 
was  in  his  own  mind  and  has  done  it  rather  con- 
sistently. 

The  Chicago  Little  Theatre  was  established  in 
1912  by  Maurice  Browne  and  his  wife  Ellen  Van 
Volkenburg.  A  room  was  secured  on  the  fourth 
floor  of  the  Fine  Arts  Building.  This  was  neatly 
adapted  into  a  theatre  seating  about  a  hundred 
people.  It  had  a  small  stage,  a  good  lighting  sys- 
tem, dressing  rooms,  offices  and  tea  rooms.  In 
this  the  theatre  was  at  home  from  the  time  of  its 
establishment  until  1917.  At  the  present  time 
the  Chicago  Little  Theatre  is  in  a  transition 
stage.  But  I  prefer  to  speak  of  it  in  the  present 
tense. 

The  achievements  and  principles  of  the  Chicago 
Little  Theatre  are  suggestive.  It  is  one  of  the 
few  theatres  which  the  founders  are  willing  to 


146      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

admit  has  a  purpose,  the  object  being  "the  crea- 
tion of  a  new  plastic  and  rhythmic  drama  in  the 
United  States."  For  my  part  I  would  be  con- 
tent had  this  purpose  not  been  named.  It  seems 
to  limit  the  scope  of  Mr.  Browne's  future  work 
without  in  fact  doing  so,  for  I  am  glad  to  say 
that  many  of  the  best  things  he  has  done  can- 
not be  explained  by  this  purpose. 

Maurice  Browne  has  always  clung  to  the  little 
theatre  idea  in  both  its  narrow  and  its  applied 
sense.  He  started  out  by  believing  thoroughly 
in  the  illusion  value  of  the  small  theatre,  and  in 
the  codes  of  production  which  its  miniature  size 
demanded.  And  he  believed  in  the  little  theatre 
in  its  applied  sense  as  well.  By  that  I  mean 
that  he  reduced  his  machinery  of  production  to 
a  point  as  near  as  possible  to  its  support.  He  un- 
dertook no  expenses  for  professional  actors,  he 
produced  his  plays  only  two  or  three  times  a  week, 
and  he  has  developed  an  audience  which  would 
support  him. 

The  most  noteworthy  characteristic  of  the  Chi- 
cago Little  Theatre  has  been  the  rigorous  code  of 
art  with  which  it  has  been  conducted.  I  know 
of  no  institution  of  the  kind  that  has  so  consist- 
ently kept  to  a  pre-ordained  set  of  principles. 
Browne's  desire  has  been  to  subject  dramatic  art 


PIONEERS  147 

to  a  cold  and  logical  set  of  principles,  to  expel 
from  it  all  the  adventitious,  the  superficial,  and 
the  temporary.  He  has  followed  his  master, 
Gordon  Craig,  in  his  distrust  of  personality  in 
acting.  In  pursuance  of  this  position  he  has 
never  published  programmes  giving  the  names  of 
actors.  How  he  has  succeeded  in  keeping  the  loy- 
alty of  players  under  such  conditions  I  cannot 
imagine.  It  is  a  mark  of  the  strength  of  the  man's 
own  devotion  that  he  has  been  able  to  call  forth 
so  much  devotion  from  others.  I  understand  that 
recently  he  has  not  been  so  successful  in  this,  and 
that  some  of  the  more  troublesome  recent  experi- 
ences go  back  to  the  fact  that  while  making  a  per- 
fect machine  of  art  he  has  not  been  able  to  build 
an  institution  of  men  and  women.  Whatever 
may  be  said  of  art  in  general,  or  even  the  art  of  the 
theatre  as  such,  the  business  of  the  theatre  de- 
mands the  faithful  and  zealous  cooperation  of 
men  and  women  who  are  identified  with  the  en- 
terprise. What  he  has  gained  in  an  absolute 
sense  has  come  at  some  expense  to  his  esprit  de 
corps. 

The  repertory  of  the  Chicago  Little  Theatre  is 
divided  into  two  distinct  classes  of  productions, 
according  to  the  system  of  staging  followed. 
The  first  class  comprises  all  those  plays  of  a  fanci- 


148     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

ful  or  poetic  nature  which  are  subject  to  staging 
by  the  well-known  principles  of  Gordon  Craig. 
To  Craig  Browne  is  a  faithful  adherent.  His 
favorite  plays,  the  plays  by  which  he  himself 
stands,  are  all  subject  to  staging  by  the  plastic 
system  which  by  his  view  is  the  basis  of  all  dra- 
matic art.  All  the  other  springs  of  the  dramatic 
are  discarded  for  those  which  lie  in  sense  and  sight. 
This  theory  involves  the  complete  reconstruction 
of  the  factors  of  a  production.  It  places  first 
emphasis  upon  the  masses,  the  lines,  the  draperies, 
the  colors  and  the  lights,  by  which  the  back- 
grounds of  the  production  are  arranged.  To  this 
principle  of  the  plastic  Browne  adds  another,  that 
of  the  rythmic  element  in  drama.  I  believe  he 
applies  this  as  well  to  all  the  factors  of  a  produc- 
tion but  as  I  do  not  understand  it  I  shall  not  at- 
tempt to  expound  it,  except  to  refer  to  it  as  an- 
other of  the  abstract  controls  which  the  producer 
holds  over  his  productions. 

The  productions  he  has  made  under  these  codes 
have  been  remarkable  pieces  of  arrangement  of 
dramatic  materials,  manipulations  of  colors, 
warmth,  and  illumination,  but  so  distant  from 
what  had  always  seemed  drama  to  me  as  to  leave 
me  perplexed.  But  they  are  more  than  crafts- 
manship. They  had  in  them  many  of  the  ele- 


PIONEERS  149 

ments  of  real  creation,  whether  dramatic  or  other 
I  do  not  know.  These  plays  which  constitute 
Browne's  first  interests  have  not  made  up  the  larg- 
est share  of  his  repertory.  The  great  majority 
of  the  plays  of  the  Little  Theatre  have  belonged 
to  a  genre  of  point-device  comedy  and  fantasy  in 
which  the  producer  has  accomplished  some  re- 
markable results  with  inexpert  materials. 

The  Chicago  Little  Theatre  has  been  a  glowing 
coal  sending  sparks  in  many  directions.  Not 
alone  has  it  been  concerned  with  producing  plays 
for  grown-ups.  One  of  the  most  interesting  fea- 
tures of  its  work  has  been  the  Little  Theatre  Pup- 
pets, created  by  the  directors  themselves  after 
study  on  the  Continent.  With  these  puppets 
there  has  been  developed  one  of  the  most  success- 
ful children's  theatre  adjuncts  in  the  country. 
In  addition  to  this  department  of  the  work  there 
is  a  department  of  entertainments  by  outside 
artists. 

A  study  of  the  repertory  of  the  Chicago  Little 
Theatre  shows  that  the  directors  have  been  able 
to  accomplish  very  little  for  the  new  American 
playwright.  Nowhere  in  the  prospectus  of  the 
organization  is  any  such  purpose  mentioned.  In 
fact  no  claim  is  made  for  an  American  theatre. 
This  is  a  little  refreshing  in  a  time  when  rather  too 


150      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

much  attention  has  been  given  to  this  particu- 
lar angle  of  the  subject.  In  Browne's  idea  the 
theatre  is  a  universal  institution.  It  belongs  to 
no  nation  nor  code.  Its  fealty  is  to  the  truths 
only  of  art  and  beauty.  Naturally  a  theatre 
founded  on  this  rock  will  be  under  some  disad- 
vantages. In  theme,  in  manner,  in  types  of  char- 
acter, the  Little  Theatre  has  thrown  down  no 
anchor  into  the  locality.  It  might  as  well  be  in 
Paris  or  in  Moscow  as  in  Chicago.  Chicago  has 
been  proud  of  it  but  it  has  not  been  able  to  adopt 
it  as  its  own.  The  position  of  the  Little  Theatre 
in  its  niche  high  up  in  a  city  building  is  symbolic 
of  the  place  it  is  taking  within  but  above  the 
city's  life. 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES 

No  one  can  say  that  hearty  labor  has  not  been 
put  into  these  little  theatres.  Futility  there  has 
been  and  a  great  deal  of  scattering  effort.  Vast 
tasks  have  been  undertaken  and  small  tasks  have 
been  failed  in.  Problems  vaguely  guessed  have 
been  attacked  with  persistency  worthy  of  clearer 
thinking  if  not  of  better  causes.  Men  have  un- 
dertaken the  creation  of  an  audience,  the  awaken- 
ing of  a  social  consciousness,  the  stimulation  of 
community  self-expression  when  they  could  not 
make  out  a  balance  sheet  of  expense,  direct  a 
company,  or  handle  a  stage  crew.  By  a  strange 
fate  they  have  had  a  measure  of  success  in  the 
larger  undertakings  while  they  were  overcome  by 
the  difficulties  of  the  smaller.  Then  we  see  fol- 
lowing this  group  another  group  who  work  more 
concretely.  Facing  the  high  expense  and  prohibi- 
tive systems  of  the  established  theatre  we  now 
find  the  guild  of  artists  delving  down  to  the  low- 

151 


152      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

est  terms  of  the  art  of  the  theatre  and  joyously 
building  it  up  again  from  the  bottom.  In  the 
cause  they  have  expended  energy,  enthusiasm, 
more  or  less  wisdom,  and  hard  got  money.  Some 
of  them  succeeded,  others  failed  because  they 
lacked  that  knowledge  of  the  technique  of  the 
stage  as  a  trade  that  is  still  necessary  for  success. 
Perhaps  it  isn't  necessary  to  know  that  a  prop 
is  not  a  stage  brace,  that  the  tormentor  is  not 
the  stage  director,  but  the  lack  of  such  knowledge 
has  been  a  great  handicap  so  far. 

We  have  now  to  consider  three  theatres  which 
from  the  start  arrange  themselves  on  another 
plane.  All  are  New  York  theatres.  All  are  set 
in  that  Bagdad  of  the  theatre,  the  city  of  the 
thousand  nights  in  one,  and  all  are  run  by  suc- 
cessful showmen.  Back  when  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury was  new  a  young  man  took  the  Castle  Square 
Theatre  in  Boston  and  put  in  a  stock  company. 
Before  long  the  rumor  was  spread  abroad  that 
Back  Bay  had  discovered  Castle  Square.  A  few 
years  later  this  young  man  had  a  chance  to  go  to 
New  York  to  take  charge  of  a  great  new  theatre 
that  had  been  erected  for  a  civic  purpose.  He 
managed  this  theatre  in  a  workmanlike  manner 
for  two  years,  keeping  his  own  counsel,  if  he  had 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     153 

any  troubles,  maintaining  a  discreet  silence  about 
them,  presenting  always  to  the  world  a  door-stone 
neatly  scrubbed  and  a  front  of  imperturbable 
calm.  The  New  Theatre  closed  its  doors  and  still 
he  said  nothing.  But  his  next  step  was  charac- 
teristic. He  moved  from  the  marble  and  gilt  of 
the  palace  in  Central  Park  West  into  a  little 
theatre  of  his  own,  as  extremely  diminutive  as 
the  other  had  been  extremely  large,  as  neat  and 
appropriate  as  the  other  had  been  garish  and  of 
bad  taste.  The  Little  Theatre  of  New  York, 
which  seats  299  people,  was  at  the  time  the  small- 
est theatre  in  New  York.  It  was  opened  March 
11,  1912. 

In  studying  the  record  of  the  Little  Theatre 
of  New  York  it  has  to  be  understood  that  Mr. 
Ames  has  explicitly  gllied  himself-with  the  pro- 
fessional traditions  of  the  stage.  In  the  ten 
years  since  his  Castle  Square  days  he  has  solidified 
this  association.  He  has  never  been  a  believer  in 
"movements"  nor  has  he  permitted  himself  to  be 
dragged  into  one.  .His  only  conscious  purpose, 
so  far  as  I  can  discover,  has  been  to  give  good 
playT^Jflittle  bit  better  than  seems  necessary," 
and  if  possible  to  be  compensated  for  the  service,  - 
though  so  far  the  latter  feature  has  been  sub- 
ordinate. 


154      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Though  he  disclaims  membership  in  a  move- 
ment there  are  respects  in  which  Mr.  Ames's  ex- 
perience in  the  Little  Theatre  must  be  studied  in 
the  light  of  contemporary  tendencies.  His  open- 
ing of  the  little  Theatre  was  understood  by  him 
to  be  distinctly  a  step  within  the  profession.  The 
theatre  was  to  be  conducted  by  a  professional 
corps,  the  actors  were  to  be  men  and  women  of  a 
distinguished  place  in  their  calling,  the  plays  were 
to  be  contracted  for  on  a  royalty  basis  and  they 
were  to  run  as  long  as  possible.  The  audience 
was  to  be  secured  wherever  possible  by  the  meth- 
ods in  vogue  in  the  commercial  theatre^  No 
particular  effort  was  to  be  made  to  attach  a  cer- 
tain audience  to  the  theatre.  There  was  no  dif- 
ference between  this  and  the  system  of  the  com- 
mercial theatre  except  in  the  size  of  the  theatre 
nd  the  implicit  contract  that  only  the  best 
plays  should  be  presented  and  in  the  best  fash- 
ion. 

.And  yet  limit  himself  as  he  would,  the  opening 
of  the  theatre  was  a  commentary  on  the  condi- 
tions I  have  been  discussing  in  this  volume.  Why 
did  Ames  build  a  little  theatre?  I  think  his  pre- 
dominant aim  was  an  artistic  one.  His  experi- 
ence with  the  New  Theatre  had  been  emphatic, 
to  say  the  least.  What  he  probably  desired  was 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     155 

a  theatre  in  which  plays  of  the  intimate  type 
could  be  presented  in  a  manner  fitting  to  their 
temper,  a  theatre  in  which  not  only  the  stage  but 
the  audience  chamber  was  fitly  administered  to 
the  mood.  Whatever  purposes  he  had  outside 
the  purpose  of  doing  the  best  thing  well  were 
secondary.  He  knew  that  there  would  be  a  cer- 
tain loss  both  on  account  of  the  limitations  in  size 
of  the  auditorium  and  on  account  of  the  character 
of  his  plays,  but  he  planned  to  make  this  up  by 
charging  a  higher  and  uniform  admission  fee  for 
the  entire  house.  He  did  this  on  the  theory  that 
there  is  an  audience  in  New  York  able  to  ignore 
the  price  of  seats  if  it  gets  what  it  wants. 

At  this  point  the  first  flaw  in  the  reasoning  oc- 
curs. That  there  is  such  an  audience  we  may 
admit  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  though  wealth 
has  not  shown  very  much  more  disposition  to 
flock  by  itself  in  America  than  have  the  middle 
classes  or  the  workers.  But  grant  that  there  is 
such  an  audience  and  it  does  not  at  all  follow 
that  this  audience  will  necessarily  want  the  best 
play  or  the  best  acting.  It  may  want  some  other 
kind  of  thing  represented  here  and  there  among 
other  theatres  to  which  its  fickle  fancy  leads  it. 
To  secure  an  audience  for  the  best,  or  let  us  say 
for  those  fresh  and  creative  things  which  at  the 


156     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

moment  seem  the  best  to  the  producer,  one  has  to 
cut  athwart  the  audience  of  money  and  create  an 
audience  anew  out  of  all  classes. 

Now  the  Little  Theatre  was  under  a  heavy 
expense.  In  land  rent,  investment,  cost  of  man- 
agement, advertising,  royalty  there  was  no  ap- 
preciable advantage  over  the  large  theatre.  It 
has  always  been  Ames's  system  to  ignore  ex- 
pense in  getting  the  best  players.  So  there  was 
no  saving  here.  His  settings  offer  no  chance 
for  saving.  All  in  all,  his  little  theatre  was  run 
on  about  the  same  budget  of  expense  as  an  aver- 
age sized  theatre  would  carry.  Consider  this  ex- 
pense budget  in  connection  with  possible  income. 
Three  hundred  seats  at  an  average  of  two  dollars 
and  a  half  gives  a  maximum  income  per  perform- 
ance of  $750,  or  an  income  of  $6000  a  week. 
Now  we  know  that  in  other  New  York  theatres 
a  company  is  expected  to  take  a  minimum  of 
$6000  a  week.  This  situation  would  not  be  so 
bad  were  it  not  that  the  takings  of  the  Little 
Theatre  have  never  reached  the  maximum.  The 
fees  themselves  are  so  high  as  to  discourage  a 
great  many  people  who  would  otherwise  come. 
We  see  why  it  has  been  more  economical  to  keep 
the  Little  Theatre  dark  than  to  run  it,  and  why 
we  must  agree  with  Mr.  Ames  that  the  little 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES 

theatre  is  at  a  disadvantage  financially  when  run 
with  professional  expense. 

Common  arithmetic  is  against  any  diminutive 
theatre  that  tries  to  run  on  a  professional  basis  of 
expense.  There  is  not  an  audience  in  New  York 
for  plays  of  an  innovating  type  willing  to  pay 
what  Mr.  Ames  asks.  And  even  if  there  were 
such  an  audience  he  would  barely  pay  his  ex- 
penses in  the  Little  Theatre  and  no  more.  Let 
us  look  at  the  record  of  the  runs  of  the  Little 
Theatre.  The  theatre  was  opened  March  11, 
1912.  That  season  it  played  one  play  regularly 
at  night  for  eight  weeks  and  two  short  plays  were 
run  in  for  17  matinees.  The  second  season  the 
theatre  played  19  weeks  with  two  plays  and  one 
children's  play  run  in  for  92  matinees.  The 
third  season  it  played  28  weeks  in  three  plays; 
the  fourth  season  28  weeks  in  one  play.  The 
fifth  season  was  dark,  and  the  sixth  season  covered 
twenty  weeks  in  three  plays.  The  theatre  was 
open  for  business  a  total  of  104  weeks  in  five 
seasons.  Counting  the  season  as  forty  weeks 
and  excluding  the  year  Mr.  Ames  was  out  on  ac- 
count of  illness  we  have  here  total  runs  cover- 
ing only  one  half  of  the  available  time.  I  can- 
not escape  the  conclusion  that  the  balance  of  prob- 
ability was  so  much  against  a  production  making 


158     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 
I 

money  in  the  Little  Theatre  under  the  system 
by  which  it  was  run  that  it  was  cheaper  to  keep 
the  house  dark  than  to  play  in  it. 

Now  it  must  be  understood  that  no  play  has 
been  given  at  the  Little  Theatre  that  has  not  been 
in  one  way  or  another  a  distinguished  piece  of 

^work.  There  was  hardly  one  that  did  not  have 
adherents  among  critics  and  audiences.  Judged 
by  standards  of  success  that  are  current  these  plays 
were  worthy  of  prosperity.  And  yet  the  dice  were 
loaded  against  the  theatre.  In  undertaking  this 
venture  within  the  professional  theatre  he  had  es- 
sayed a  hopeless  task.  He  had  gone  only  half 
way  and  had  landed  outside  the  city.  Either  he 
should  have  held  to  the  theatre  of  ordinary  size, 
or,  taking  the  little  theatre,  he  should  have  re- 
duced his  standard  of  expense  to  fit.  This  Mr. 
Ames  has  been  unwilling  to  do.  His  artistic  na- 
ture recoils  from  any  recession  from  the  finest 
standards  of  a  production.  And  so  he  has  a 
white  mouse  on  his  hands.  If  anything  shows 
(the  need  of  the  little  theatre  movement  it  is  the 
little  theatre  that  has  consistently  stayed  out  of 

'the  movement.  For  the  movement  has  meant 
that  economy  of  production,  that  organization  of 
resources,  by  which  the  insoluble  problems  of  the 
professional  theatre  may  be  faced. 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     159 

There  are  evidences  that  Mr.  Ames  has  dis- 
covered that  logic  lies  against  his  plan  of  man- 
agement, and  that  this  discovery  has  introduced 
into  his  work,  mainly  into  his  choice  of  plays,  a 
note  of  indecision  and  of  compromise  that  has 
weakened  his  hold  on  his  audience.  It  soon  be- 
came evident  that  he  had  given  up  offering  plays 
to  an  audience  and  had  begun  to  pursue  the 
audience.  He  always  kept  within  the  limits  of 
propriety  in  selection,  now  and  then  putting  in 
a  little  pungent  sauce  as  an  appetizer,  and  no 
theatre  in  New  York  has  provided  such  produc- 
tions. But  too  soon  it  became  a  case  not  of  the 
Little  Theatre  giving  its  audience  such  and  such 
a  new  morsel  selected  by  its  director,  but  a  case 
of  the  director  holding  out  a  certain  play  to  lure 
an  audience  into  his  playhouse. 

There  is  all  the  difference  in  the  world  between 
an  audience  going  to  a  theatre  and  a  theatre  go- 
ing to  the  audience.  When  they  began  to  put 
up  twinkling  electric  signs  over  a  theatre  en- 
trance there  was  spelled  the  end  of  the  era  in 
which  the  audience  came  to  the  theatre.  Then 
began  the  period  of  the  feverish  allurement  of 
audiences  that  we  have  been  living  through  for 
the  last  dozen  years.  In  one  week  two  years 


160     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

ago  we  received  announcements  of  two  new  in- 
stitutions of  the  theatre.  In  the  first  statement 
neither  seemed  to  differ  much  from  many  others 
that  had  been  projected.  As  time  has  passed  it 
has  become  clear  that  each  had  been  planted  in 
a  more  natural  soil  than  its  neighbors,  that  it 
was  beginning  to  grow  in  that  soil,  that  audiences, 
actors  and  playwrights  were  showing  a  disposi- 
tion to  foster  the  new  enterprises.  In  these  thea- 
tres we  have  seen  beginning  again  the  more  nat- 
ural process  by  which  the  audiences  come  to  the 
theatre. 

Down  in  the  heart  of  the  East  End  of  New 
York  City,  in  the  center  of  a  foreign  city  of  a 
million  inhabitants,  where  still  may  be  seen  on 
the  streets  the  market  wagons  of  Russia,  there 
lies  the  district  out  of  which  have  come  several 
significant  enterprises  in  the  new  drama.  In  the 
Educational  Alliance  on  East  Broadway  there 
was  established  the  first  New  York  Children's 
Theatre.  The  Portmanteau  stage  was  first  set. 
up  in  the  hall  of  Christadora  House.  And  the 
Neighborhood  Players  began  their  work  as  an 
adjunct  to  the  Henry  Street  Settlement. 

This  Neighborhood  Playhouse  has  been  vari- 
ously regarded.  It  has  been  looked  upon  as  an 
important  contribution  of  the  theatre  to  the  solu- 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     161 

tion  of  social  problems,  as  the  offering  of  theatri- 
cal art  to  the  amalgamation  of  our  peoples  and  the 
Americanization  of  the  foreign  born,  and  as  an 
experiment  in  the  creation  of  a  theatre  in  the 
midst  of  a  society  in  which  the  materials  are 
most  ready  for  this  work.  It  is  in  the  latter  light, 
I  believe,  that  those  who  have  been  responsible 
for  the  Neighborhood  Theatre  look  upon  their 
work.  They  have  burdened  their  minds  with 
very  few  doctrines  and  have  permitted  themselves 
to  think  of  few  ultimate  purposes.  They  have 
been  conscious  only  of  using  their  materials  as 
their  knowledge  and  energy  dictated. 

This  principle  is  a  fortunate  one.  We  have 
had  theatres  established  by  the  fiat  of  directors 
and  pushed  through  by  force  of  money  and  will 
against  serious  obstacles.  Here  was  a  theatre  that 
never  went  further  than  its  materials  warranted, 
that  expanded  always  out  of  the  funded  accumula- 
tion of  past  achievements.  The  most  important 
thing  about  the  theatre  is  the  naturalness  of  its 
growth.  What  is  owed  to  its  founders  is  not 
the  will  that  established  it  but  the  wisdom  that 
was  able  to  foster  and  develop  latent  social  im- 
pulses. Literally  nothing  in  the  Neighborhood 
Theatre  has  been  superimposed.  Money  has  been 
provided  in  plenty.  But  here  it  was  a  case  of 


162      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

money  coming  to  the  aid  of  brains  and  understand- 
ing and  not,  as  has  so  often  been  the  case,  money 
as  a  substitute  for  both. 

A  few  of  the  circumstances  that  conduced  to 
the  success  of  this  theatre  must  be  mentioned. 
The  first  of  these  is  that  the  theatre  associates  it- 
self naturally  with  the  play  functions  of  society. 
Garble  and  degrade  them  as  we  may,  these  are 
the  sources  of  the  theatre.  And  he  who  would 
establish  a  new  theatre  must  build  by  these  prin- 
ciples. Now,  the  founders  of  the  Neighborhood 
Theatre  knew  that  nothing  is  more  inconsistent 
with  the  play  principles  than  a  settled  social  pro- 
gramme. For  this  reason  the  Neighborhood 
Playhouse  has  never  been  considered  a  part  of  the 
machinery  of  the  Henry  Street  Settlement.  It 
is  an  outgrowth  of  the  settlement,  a  flowering 
of  its  spirit  and  work.  As  some  one  has  said, 
it  is  the  Henry  Street  little  girl  who  went  on  the 
stage,  over  whom  Henry  Street  keeps  a  benevolent 
eye  and  loving  care  while  leaving  her  free  to  find 
her  own  career. 

As  it  occurs,  the  natural  impulses  of  play  are 
in  this  neighborhood  maintained  more  in  their 
natural  state  than  in  any  other  district  in  the 
metropolis.  The  people  of  the  neighborhood  had 
been  theatre-goers  at  home.  They  brought  with 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     163 

them  their  folk  life,  that  flexible,  garrulous  so- 
ciableness — one  can  see  it  on  the  streets — out  of 
which  the  activities  of  the  festival  grow.  And  it 
was  from  these  festival  activities  already  present, 
only  directed  and  enriched  by  nurture  and  care 
that  the  activities  of  the  playhouse  grew.  For 
several  years  all  the  activities  this  theatre  knew 
were  simply  the  festivals,  the  dances,  of  the  peo- 
ple comprising  the  neighborhood.  To-day  while 
the  purely  theatric  doings  have  gone  far  the  fes- 
tivals continue  as  the  source  and  soul  of  the  whole 
affair. 

Let  no  one  think  I  am  presenting  this  theatre 
as  an  example  of  spontaneous  social  growth. 
Nothing  is  further  from  the  truth.  The  district 
would  have  gone  on  indefinitely  in  its  own  way 
and  never  have  been  heard  of  for  its  theatrical 
ambitions  had  it  not  been  for  those  who  were 
wise  enough  to  seize  and  develop  its  potentialities. 
The  important  thing  is  the  spirit  in  which  this 
was  done.  The  one  external  circumstance  that 
cannot  be  ignored  is  the  fact  that  in  the  guidance 
of  the  natural  forces  of  the  district  there  was 
gathered  together  as  wise  and  expert  a  group  of 
enthusiasts  as  ever  handled  a  lash  line  or  pinned 
on  a  ruff.  One  notices  with  a  certain  humility 
that  in  the  group  that  has  guided  the  Neighbor- 


164     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

hood  Playhouse  to  success  there  has  been  no  place 
for  a  man.  The  Misses  Irene  and  Alice  Lewisohn 
had  gone  to  the  Henry  Street  Settlement  to  teach 
dancing.  They  had  discovered  a  certain  famous 
dancing  teacher  long  before  he  had  become  the 
master  of  the  dance  to  the  American  aristocracy. 
With  them  was  joined  in  the  work  of  the  theatre 
Miss  Helen  Arthur  who  had  learned  the  ropes  in 
the  office  of  the  most  practical  manager  in  the 
country.  Miss  Agnes  Morgan  had  been  one  of 
Baker's  first  pupils  in  drama  at  Radcliffe.  And 
Mrs.  Sarah  Cowell  LeMoyne  represented  all  that 
was  best  in  the  tradition  of  the  American  stage, 
in  taste,  in  diction,  and  in  action.  To  these  the 
success  of  the  theatre  is  to  be  credited. 

As  has  been  said  it  all  began  with  festivals. 
Then  about  seven  years  ago  the  Dramatic  Club 
of  the  Henry  Street  Settlement  was  formed. 
Plays  were  given  once  a  year  in  Clinton  Hall,  one 
of  the  halls  provided  by  private  interests  for  the 
use  of  the  neighborhood.  These  plays  were  re- 
hearsed at  night.  Actors  came  from  the  neigh- 
borhood and  there  was  little  difficulty  in  finding 
young  men  and  women  of  spirit  and  ability.  Not 
only  the  annual  performance  but  the  long  course 
of  preparation  came  to  be  events  of  first  magni- 
tude. Meanwhile  the  dancing  classes  and  festi: 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     165 

vals  were  continuing.  They  were  learning  the 
forms  of  all  the  countries  of  the  old  world.  And 
by  natural  stages  there  was  gathered  together  an 
institution  without  a  building  constructed  of  the 
human  fabric  of  a  crowded  neighborhood.  As 
"The  Theatre"  had  come  the  time  had  come  to 
give  it  a  house.  And  so  they  built  a  home  for  an 
institution  that  was  calling  for  one,  not  as  others 
have  done,  building  a  theatre  and  waiting  for  the 
spirit  to  come  and  occupy  it. 

They  tell  us  that  when  the  theatre  was  built 
(including  ground  and  additions  it  cost  about 
$150,000)  they  thought  they  might  have  to  wait 
two  years  before  they  began  to  attract  many  to 
their  performances.  But  from  the  date  of  the 
first  opening  to  this  the  theatre  has  always  been 
practically  sold  out.  It  was  built  as  a  neighbor- 
hood theatre  and  so  it  is.  But  in  two  years  the 
neighborhood  has  expanded  to  cover  Greater  New 
York.  Not  only  do  the  actors  come  from  as  far 
away  as  Newark  and  the  Bronx  but  the  audiences 
come  regularly  from  up  town.  Special  street  cars 
now  stop  before  the  door,  and  when  the  car  stops 
there  is  an  exodus  of  passengers  recruited  from  the 
subway,  the  elevated  and  the  river  tubes. 

The  directors  of  this  theatre  insist  that  they 
are  running  a  theatre  and  not  a  sociological  ex- 


166     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

periment  station.  And  as  their  theatre  is  a  suc- 
cess it  may  pay  us  to  inquire  as  to  some  of  their 
activities.  At  the  basis  of  these  of  course  is  the 
service  of  the  neighborhood  and  so  the  larger 
share  of  the  work  of  the  theatre  is  given  over  to 
productions  of  a  local  appeal.  Every  night,  with 
the  exception  of  Monday  night,  which  is  dark, 
and  Saturday  and  Sunday  nights,  is  given  over  to 
motion  pictures.  The  price  of  admission  is  five 
cents.  The  best  available  pictures  are  secured 
regardless  of  cost,  and  in  addition  there  are  given 
extra  features,  short  talks,  songs,  and  one-act 
plays.  This  feature  of  the  theatre's  work  has 
always  paid  for  itself.  Where  there  is  a  surplus 
it  is  expended  on  future  productions. 

Another  neighborhood  feature  is  the  entertain- 
ments for  the  children.  These  are  given  on  Satur- 
day afternoons.  They  grow  out  of  the  children's 
festival  groups  which  are  attached  to  the  settle- 
ment. They  comprise  pantomimes  and  children's 
plays,  always  dealing  with  original  materials,  and 
produced  and  played  by  the  children  under  ex- 
pert direction.  For  these  the  fee  is  ten  cents  and 
they  too  are  self-supporting. 

We  now  come  to  the  larger  theatrical  features 
of  the  work.  Six  years  ago  when  they  began  to 
give  plays  they  laid  the  nucleus  of  an  amateur 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     167 

company.  Though  this  company  changes  from 
time  to  time  in  membership  it  remains  stable  as 
a  whole  and  the  theatre  now  has  an  acting  group 
of  thirty-five,  augmented  by  a  dancing  group  of 
sixty.  With  the  acting  group,  and  with  the  art- 
ists, light  men,  mechanicians,  property  men,  cos- 
tume workers,  the  producing  of  the  theatre  is  done. 
In  this  branch  of  the  work  the  theatre  has  at- 
tached itself  to  the  newer  movements  in  stage 
art,  for  plays,  playing,  and  setting.  The  stage 
is  excellently  equipped.  It  had  the  first  circular 
fixed  horizon  j^oeetc-  in  the  country.  Experiment 
in  effects  is  the  order  and  success  is  the  rule.  The 
list  of  plays  produced  in  this  branch  comprises 
several  of  Dunsany's,  many  there  first  presented 
in  the  country,  several  new  American  plays,  and 
some  of  the  more  ambitious  pantomimes  from 
Russia. 

For  these  performances  a  maximum  of  fifty 
cents  is  charged.  Each  play  is  done  for  five  weeks 
or  ten  times.  In  order  to  secure  variety  in  offer- 
ing, after  five  weeks  of  plays  there  comes  a  fes- 
tival period  of  an  equal  length.  This  department 
too  pays  for  itself.  But  no  department  of  the 
theatre's  work  is  permitted  to  show  a  profit.  The 
theatre  has  been  very  hospitable  in  taking  in  pro- 
ductions of  other  managements,  particularly  those 


168     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

showing  novelty.  .For  these  the  management 
sometimes  makes  the  productions.  In  this  way 
David  Bispham,  the  East  and  West  Players,  and 
Gertrude  Kingston  have  been  given  place  in  the 
theatre.  Behind  this  public  work  there  is  done 
all  the  work  that  is  necessary  for  the  production. 
Everything  is  the  product  of  the  work-rooms  of 
the  theatre.  Costumes,  properties,  scenery,  light- 
ing effects,  are  all  made  at  home.  The  theatre  is 
a  cooperative  guild  of  enthusiastic  craftsmen, 
»  artists,  and  artisans. 

The  question  arises,  how  can  all  this  be  done 
and  be  made  to  support  itself.  While  other  thea- 
tres are  trying  and  failing  how  can  this  theatre 
succeed.  The  answer  goes  back  to  the  non-com- 
mercial nature  of  the  enterprise.  This  is  more 
important  than  it  may  seem.  It  depends  upon 
the  hearty  cooperation  of  interested  workers. 
The  spirit  of  zest  is  kept  alive  by  the  fact  that 
the  workers  are  always  kept  interested.  They 
are  doing  what  they  want  to  do  instead  of  doing 
what  they  are  compelled  to  do  to  get  an  audience. 
The  expense  budget  has  been  carefully  worked 
out.  The  theatre,  a  small  one  seating  about  450, 
can  hold  between  $160  and  $190.  This  gives 
an  income  for  each  play  production  covering  ten 
performances  of  about  $1500.  By  careful  figur- 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     169 

ing  the  management  has  been  able  to  secure  the 
usual  production  for  just  about  this  sum.  Some- 
times the  production  costs  more  and  sometimes 
less  than  the  income  but  year  by  year  income 
covers  expense  for  productions.  Comparing  these 
figures  with  the  figures  given  in  the  first  chapter, 
it  is  found  that  the  expenses  of  the  Neighborhood 
Theatre  for  a  production  are  but  a  small  percent- 
age of  those  of  a  commercial  theatre.  The 
mechanical  features  of  the  production,  staging, 
costumes,  lights,  are  of  the  very  highest  class.  It 
should  be  understood  that  these  figures  are  exclu- 
sive of  any  rent  item,  about  which  more  in  a  mo- 
ment. 

The  system  of  production  has  had  an  influence 
on  the  audiences.  Audiences  have  learned  that 
they  can  always  see  something  interesting  and 
fresh  at  the  Neighborhood  Theatre.  For  this 
reason  they  come  to  the  theatre,  they  do  not  com- 
pel it  to  come  to  them.  Whereas  the  expense  of 
advertising  of  the  commercial  theatre  runs  from 
15  to  20  percent,  of  the  total  income  the  expense 
is  reduced  for  the  Neighborhood  Playhouse  to  a 
very  low  figure  indeed.  No  efforts  are  made  di- 
rectly to  lure  the  audience.  No  newspaper  ad- 
vertising is  carried,  and  no  newspaper  tickets  are 
sent  out.  It  is  understood  that  seats  are  ready 


iyo      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

for  such  newspaper  men  as  desire  them  but  noth- 
ing is  done  to  urge  the  attention  of  the  news- 
papers. The  audience  of  the  Neighborhood 
Theatre  has  selected  itself.  All  that  it  is  neces- 
sary to  do  is  to  send  out  cards  to  the  3500  on  the 
special  list  and  occasionally  to  1800  on  the  general 
list  and  the  work  is  done.  Unlike  other  small 
theatres  the  Neighborhood  Theatre  has  no  sub- 
scription list. 

When  we  are  answering  the  question  of  expense 
in  connection  with  the  Neighborhood  Theatre  it 
is  necessary  to  keep  in  mind  that  the  building,  all 
that  is  known  as  the  plant,  is  provided  without 
rent  and  without  interest  charges  by  interested 
backers.     The  income  of  the  theatre  has  only  to 
\  pay  for  what  goes  on  before  the  footlights.     No 
/  part  of  it  goes  for  any  of  the  items  which  in  the 
commercial  theatre  amount  to  fifty  percent,  of  the 
production  expense.     Now  it  must  be  admitted 
that  to  this  extent  the  Neighborhood  Theatre  is 
an  endowed  theatre.     It  could  not  conceivably 
]    run  on  any  plan  other  than  that  of  continual  sup- 
port so  far  as  the  building  is  concerned.     And 
precisely  to  this  extent  the  answer  given  by  the 
Neighborhood  Playhouse  as  to  artistic  freedom 
and  support  is  only  half  an  answer.     It  is  be- 
t  cause  this  theatre  depends  more  upon  the  wisdom 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     171 

with  which  it  has  been  conducted  than  upon  the 
gratuities  with  which  it  is  endowed  that  it  has 
been  raised  above  the  level  of  the  subsidy  ex- 
periments that  have  been  such  melancholy  fail-^ 
ures.  The  important  things  are  the  cooperative 
method  of  government,  the  healthy  relationship 
with  its  patronage,  the  artistic  freedom  and  fresh- 
ness of  its  work,  its  thorough  business-like  econ- 
omy without  any  leaning  toward  the  box  office. 
These  things  make  this  one  of  the  two  most  sig- 
nificant theatres  in  America  today. 

We  have  seen  that  on  account  of  its  gratuitous 
support  of  a  building  the  Neighborhood  Theatre 
leaves  the  question  of  popular  support  of  an  art- 
istic theatre  only  half  solved.  Is  the  problem 
incapable  of  solution?  It  is  by  no  means  neces- 
sary to  answer  this  question  in  the  negative  as 
yet.  For  support  of  a  continuing  optimism  we 
can  refer  to  another  New  York  theatre  which 
has  undertaken  a  task  even  more  difficult  in  a 
financial  sense  than  that  of  the  Neighborhood 
Playhouse  and  has  so  far  progressed  toward  suc- 
cess as  to  warrant  hope  for  its  perpetuity.  I  re- 
fer to  the  Washington  Square  Players.  Nat- 
urally no  one  can  say  that  this  theatre  has  solved 
the  problem  until  it  has  behind  it  a  fund  for  the 


172      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

support  of  lean  years.  But  what  this  theatre 
has  already  done  is  very  encouraging  indeed. 

The  development  of  the  Washington  Square 
Players  has  been  not  less  natural  than  that  of  the 
Neighborhood  Playhouse.  The  Players  are  the 
outgrowth  of  a  little  group  that  used  to  fore- 
gather in  Washington  Square,  radicals,  socialists, 
progressives,  artists,  writers,  and  plain  men  and 
women.  There  they  used  to  talk  until  early  in 
the  morning.  They  believed  in  talk,  talk  as  the 
alembic  of  deeds,  the  coalescence  of  personality, 
the  flail  of  values  by  which  the  false  is  threshed 
from  the  true.  Long  before  the  Players  had  come 
to  pass  as  an  actuality  their  coming  was  pre- 
pared for  in  discussion. 

In  this  early  group  we  have  the  necessary  fac- 
tors of  the  new  constitution  of  the  theatre.  Here 
was  the  guild  of  artists  whose  enthusiasms  took 
the  place  of  the  cold  organization  by  commercial 
^compact  of  the  regular  theatre.  To  such  a  group 
as  this  the  theatre  presented  itself  as  something 
of  a  social  adventure.  All  its  difficulties  were 
simply  spurs  to  endeavor,  whets  to  ingenuity. 
Many  in  the  group  had  already  tasted  the  joys 
of  the  theatre.  The  others  were  social  idealists 
of  one  type  or  another.  To  all  of  them  the 
project  spelt  another  opportunity  in  creation. 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     173 

Their  zeal  was  that  of  the  artist  spurred  with 
the  discovery  of  a  new  world.  There  were 
radicals  from  the  Rand  School  of  Social  Science 
who  had  proudly  been  the  first  to  present  Dun- 
sany's  "The  Glittering  Gate."  One  had  been  a 
critic  and  had  had  a  play  done  at  the  Princess — 
house  of  scandals  and  shockers — and  had  acted 
in  Strindberg's  "Pariah."  Two  were  English 
actors.  One  had  been  with  Ames.  One  was  a 
patent  attorney  with  leanings  toward  the  box- 
office.  One  of  the  women  was  an  actress  who 
had  wearied  of  the  limitations  of  her  profession. 
Another  woman  was  an  accomplished  press  agent. 
All  had  read  plays,  written  plays,  and  either  acted 
plays,  produced  them  or  dreamed  of  doing 
so.  Thus  in  this  first  group  there  were  the 
workers,  there  was  the  will,  and  there  was  the 
vision. 

So  the  idea  of  a  theatre  was  born.  They  had 
seen  enough  of  these  efforts  to  know  that  if  they 
started  they  must  keep  on.  There  must  be  no 
turning  back.  And  so  they  projected  their  thea- 
tre, their  purpose  being  "to  establish  a  stage  for 
experimentation,  to  put  it  at  the  disposal  of  com- 
petent authors  and  producers  who  might  have 
something  vital  to  contribute,  to  put  into  execu- 
tion swiftly  and  without  undue  regard  to  hamper- 


174 

ing  detail  any  artistic  idea  that  seemed  worthy 
of  trial." 

Difficulties  began  at  once.  As  the  little  hall 
which  had  been  promised  to  them  was  lost 
through  delay  in  organizing  they  took  an  aban- 
doned stable  in  133  McDougall  Street  and  pro- 
ceeded to  make  it  over  into  a  little  theatre.  With 
the  first  steps  in  building  began  the  course  of 
training  of  the  young  enthusiasts.  They  ran  in 
rapid  succession  against  all  the  laws  framed  by 
the  city  to  protect  its  citizens  against  the  schemes 
of  the  reformer.  Fire  laws,  police  laws,  laws  for 
the  framing  of  licenses  were  faced  and  succes- 
sively satisfied.  By  the  time  they  had  the  last 
law  quieted  the  landlady  of  the  stable  turned 
against  them.  Another  law  had  popped  up  and 
had  made  her  apprehensive.  So  133  McDougall 
Street  was  given  up.  The  middle  of  the  season 
was  at  hand  and  there  was  no  theatre. 

About  this  time  the  attention  of  the  crowd  was 
called  to  a  venture  up  town.  On  East  5yth 
Street  stood  a  little  theatre  called  the  Adolf 
Phillip  Theatre,  seating  only  a  few  hundred  and 
for  long  a  burden  to  the  owners.  In  December, 
,'1914,  the  New  York  Play  Actors,  Incorporated, 
\  had  taken  this  little  theatre,  renamed  it  the  Band- 
box and  announced  the  opening  of  a  professional 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     175 

engagement  on  high  art  principles  in  Jerome  K. 
Jerome's  "Poor  Little  Thing"  from  the  French 
of  Jules  Lemaitre.  The  venture,  a  worthy  one 
in  all  respects,  had  been  well  received  by  the 
critics,  but  had  died  for  want  of  support.  Mean- 
while, too,  the  Punch  and  Judy  Theatre  had  been 
launched  and  was  sailing  in  choppy  seas.  Audi- 
ences apparently  had  not  yet  learned  to  come  to 
the  little  theatres. 

Nothing  daunted  the  Washington  Square 
group,  now  homeless  and  with  an  opening  an- 
nounced for  a  week  or  two  ahead,  turned  to  the  un- 
lucky Bandbox  Theatre  as  to  their  salvation. 
They  were  able  to  make  advantageous  terms  for 
the  theatre  for  Friday  and  Saturday  nights  of  each 
week  for  the  remainder  of  the  season.  They  con- 
tinued rehearsals  on  their  list  of  plays,  made  re- 
newed attack  upon  their  little  group  of  friends, 
announced  their  opening,  and  named  a  popular 
price,  fifty  cents.  At  the  outset  it  was  understood 
that  no  one  in  the  company  was  to  be  paid,  that  all 
income  was  to  be  used  for  support,  and  that,  what- 
ever happened,  their  first  season  was  to  be  com- 
pleted. As  to  plays  they  stated  in  their  prospec- 
tus that  they  intended  to  do  "realistic,  romantic, 
and  frivolous  plays."  Plays  by  Americans  were 
to  be  preferred  in  order  to  encourage  native  writ- 


176     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

ers,  but  foreign  plays  were  always  to  be  accept- 
able. New  ideas  in  stage  direction  and  decora- 
tion were  to  be  welcomed. 

There  was  quaking  in  a  dozen  pairs  of  shoes 
as  the  plays,  which  had  been  selected  for  pro- 
duction in  a  theatre  holding  a  hundred  and  be- 
fore a  club  of  friends,  began  to  approach  produc- 
tion in  a  theatre  seating  three  hundred  of  the  gen- 
eral public.  The  first  production  was  made 
February  19,  1915.  When  they  opened  the 
theatre  the  house  was  sold  out  for  the  first  per- 
formance, almost  sold  out  for  the  second  per- 
formance, and  three  tickets  were  sold  for  the  fol- 
lowing Friday.  After  the  first  performance 
everything  was  sold  out  and  continued  to  be  sold 
out  for  the  remainder  of  the  season.  On  the  part 
of  the  critics  the  Players  were  immediately  rec- 
ognized for  having  provided  "the  most  novel 
theatrical  opening  ever  seen  in  the  city."  Among 
the  points  stressed  in  the  first  criticisms  were  the 
freedom  from  commercialism,  the  simplicity  and 
"wistful  unreality,"  the  sincerity  and  humanity, 
the  freedom  from  theatrical  ism  of  the  playing. 
The  Washington  Square  Players  had  come  at  the 
proper  time.  Not  only  were  they  ready  for  the 
city  but  the  city  was  ready  for  them. 

The  remainder  of  this  first  season  and  the  sub- 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     177 

sequent  history  of  the  Washington  Square  Play- 
ers may  be  rapidly  summarized  in  order  that  we 
may  get  to  the  salient  points  in  our  critique.  In 
their  first  season  the  Players  rendered  forty-three  -t 
performances  of  fourteen  one-act  plays.  Of 
these  ten  were  American  plays.  They  charged 
fifty  cents  admission,  paid  no  salaries  nor  royal- 
ties and  came  out  even  at  the  end.  Rent  during 
the  first  season  was  low.  The  second  season 
opened  October  4,  1915,  in  the  Bandbox  Thea- 
tre, which  the  Players  now  rented  for  $8000  for 
the  entire  season.  They  now  had  twenty-five 
people  in  their  group.  Beginning  with  six  per- 
formances a  week  they  raised  their  prices  to  the 
one  dollar  standard,  and  paid  some  salaries.  For 
this  season  they  promised  to  subscribers  five  pro- 
ductions during  a  season  covering  thirty  weeks. 
Business  began  slowly  this  season  but  increased 
with  the  second  bill  and  their  success  was  such 
that  at  the  end  of  the  season  they  were  again 
ready  to  expand. 

In  April,  1916,  it  was  announced  that  the 
Players  would  give  up  the  Bandbox  Theatre  and  , 
come  down  town  to  the  Comedy  Theatre  near 
Broadway.  They  first  undertook  a  summer  en- 
gagement beginning  June  5,  in  a  repertory  of  suc- 
cesses. The  response  not  being  encouraging  they 


178     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

closed  to  open  again  in  the  Comedy  Theatre  in 
the  fall.  They  reopened  with  multiplied  obliga- 
h  tions.  The  rental  of  the  Comedy  was  $32,000  for 
the  bare  building.  To  this  had  to  be  added 
license  and  those  other  features  which  are  included 
in  rent  under  the  share  system.  A  building  op- 
posite was  taken  for  headquarters,  workshops,  and 
a  school.  A  company  was  sent  on  tour  with  a 
selection  from  the  repertory.  The  active  group 
now  numbered  about  one  hundred.  In  spite  of 
increased  expenses  the  year  was  encouraging  to 
the  directors.  The  standard  of  admission  was 
set  at  two  dollars  and  under. 

The  third  season  ran  through  until  May  and 
then  began  a  summer  engagement  in  two  old 
favorites  and  one  new  play.  Throughout  the 
three  seasons  the  Players  have  kept  faith  with 
their  subscribers,  giving  five  complete  bills  a  sea- 
son for  the  last  two  seasons  and  several  extra 
productions  as  well.  In  three  seasons  they  have 
presented  47  one-act  plays  and  three  long  plays, 
"  '"Aglavaine  and  Selysette,"  "The  Sea  Gull"  and 
"Ghosts." 

The  Washington  Square  Players  are  the  first 
company  starting  with  the  express  purpose  of 
/presenting  plays  "not  otherwise  seen  in  the  pro- 
fessional theatre"  that  has  been  able  to  compete 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     179 

with  the  professional  theatre  and  keep  alive. 
What  are  the  reasons  for  their  success?  They 
have  run  throughout  on  the  theory  of  the  coop- 
eration of  the  artists.  The  basis  of  association 
has  always  been  voluntary  work.  They  have 
continued  this  principle  up  to  the  present. 
Though  to-day  a  large  number  of  the  workers, 
business  staff,  technical  staff,  and  some  dozen  of 
the  actors  are  paid,  the  ideal  of  free  will  service 
is  still  in  force.  Their  continued  life  was  de- 
pendent on  this  principle. 

The  company  has  proceeded  on  the  theory  of 
a  continual  capitalization  of  its  accumulated  as- 
sets. To  change  the  figure  they  have  pyramided 
their  gains.  Never  going  beyond  a  sane  valua- 
tion of  the  ground  already  gained  they  have  be- 
lieved that  every  position  successfully  taken  jus- 
tifies and  obligates  a  further  advance.  They  be- 
lieve that  there  is  an  increasingly  large  public 
for  their  wares.  I  think  that  in  very  great  meas- 
ure it  is  the  fact  that  they  are  always  on  tiptoe 
for  advance  that  has  helped  them.  Not  for  them 
conservatism,  or  hanging  back,  or  the  counsels 
of  fear.  Every  success  was  a  contract  signed  for 
a  future  success.  If  they  had  stopped  for  a  mo- 
ment they  would  have  fallen.  Of  course  there 
is  another  side  to  this  that  one  sees  very  clearly. 


i8o     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

But  at  present  I  am  dealing  with  the  Players  as  a 
success. 

The  Washington  Square  Players  began  with 
the  idea  that  the  public  should  come  to  their  thea- 
tre; their  theatre  would  not  seek  out  the  public, 
and  they  have  maintained  this  position.  It  is  for 
this  I  think  that  I  respect  them  most.  They  have 
held  that  the  right  and  obligation  rests  upon  the 
artist  to  do  what  he  wants  to  do,  the  thing  that  at 
the  time  is  necessary  for  his  expression  and  his 
growth.  They  believe  that  only  in  this  way  can 
they  give  the  audiences  fresh  and  creative  works. 
Of  course  this  does  not  mean  that  all  their  plays 
have  been  good  and  well  selected.  They  were 
limited  in  selection  by  what  was  offered  and  they 
made  some  mistakes,  I  suppose.  But  they  have 
had  eyes  where  many  another  has  been  blind  and 
they  do  not  apologize  for  their  selections.  Above 
all  the  box  office  has  never  been  consulted.  And 
that  has  been  very  good  for  the  box  office. 

These  are  matters  of  broad  principle.  In  some 
narrower  matters  of  policy  and  administration 
their  management  has  been  worthy  of  study.  As 
a  nucleus  of  support  they  have  kept  themselves 
in  close  and  sincere  relationship  with  a  group  of 
subscribers.  This  group,  which  has  grown  gradu- 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     181 

ally,  has  now  become  the  backbone  of  the  organ- 
ization of  which  the  company  itself  is  the  head. 
Not  supplying  a  large  amount  of  money  it  places 
into  the  hands  of  the  company  a  fund  of  about 
$10,000  to  see  them  through  the  season.  This 
provides  a  little  more  than  $1500  per  produc- 
tion, precisely  the  amount  we  have  seen  is  spent 
for  a  production  by  the  Neighborhood  Players. 
The  subscribers  pay  for  the  production.  The 
rest  of  the  expenses  must  be  paid  from  the  tak- 
ings in  at  the  box  office. 

Some  principles  of  company  government  will 
repay  attention.  A  dramatic  company  differs 
from  others  in  that  it  is  both  a  social  and  an  art 
enterprise.  As  a  social  enterprise  it  demands 
the  instrumentalities  of  organization,  committee 
management,  centralized  control  and  responsibil- 
ity. As  an  art  it  requires  singleness  of  direction 
and  individuality  of  initiative.  How  to  combine 
these  things  is  a  question.  Needless  to  say  they 
cannot  be  combined  perfectly.  Human  nature 
is  not  so  made.  The  Washington  Square  Play- 
ers are  not  different  from  any  other  human 
beings.  Of  course  there  have  been  defections 
from  the  ranks.  But  as  a  rule  there  has  been  a 
careful  adaptation  of  distributed  forces  to  a  single 


182      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

aim.     For  this  as  for  so  much  else  in  the  organ- 
ization credit  has  to  be  given  to  the  real  genius 
v  of  the  director,  Edward  Goodman. 

Perhaps  it  may  properly  be  said  that  the  sys- 
tem followed  by  the  Players  is  the  protection  of 
the  individual  director  by  a  committee.  The  com- 
mittee is  not  in  authority  over  him.  It  is  buf- 
fer for  him.  It  is  eyes  and  fingers  and  functions 
for  him.  Of  course  it  is  not  so  officially.  Offi- 
cially he  is  the  creature  of  the  committee.  But 
the  only  way  in  which  the  machine  will  run  well 
is  for  the  director  to  be  left  free  to  operate  his 
idea  through  the  detailing  and  testing  processes 
of  the  committee.  This  is  shown  in  the  case  of 
the  reading  and  the  production  of  plays.  Nat- 
urally one  man  cannot  read  all  nor  can  he  produce 
all.  So  they  are  read  by  a  reader  first  and  the 
possible  plays  only  are  turned  over  to  the  director. 
But  his  choice  is  always  surveyed  by  the  com- 
mittee and  no  play  is  produced  upon  which  the 
committee  will  not  agree.  And  no  one  man  can 
produce  all  the  plays  any  more  than  he  could 
act  in  all  of  them  or  create  the  sets.  All  the 
work  of  the  Players  is  delegated.  Each  worker 
looks  back  to  the  group  that  is  typified  by  the 
director.  But  he  himself  is  delegated. 

A  few  points   in  connection   with   the  plays 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     183 

may  be  worth  mentioning.  The  theatre  started 
out  with  the  idea  of  doing  the  inaccessible  things, 
the  things  that  pique  the  interest  and  do  not  in- 
sult the  intelligence.  In  making  a  repertory  there 
are  many  considerations,  1st,  the  Ideal;  2nd,  the 
Necessity;  3d,  the  Strategy.  The  first  is  what 
one  would  do  if  he  kept  his  eye  only  on  the  play 
itself.  The  Necessity  is  what  one  does  dictated 
by  one's  means  and  the  pressure  of  the  audience. 
The  Strategy  is  what  one  does  to  put  the  ideal 
over  in  view  of  the  Necessity.  The  best  strategy 
is  often  no  strategy  for  it  sometimes  happens  that 
the  ideal  goes  over  of  itself.  But  not  always. 

On  the  side  of  the  ideal  the  Washington  Square 
Players  have  stood  sponsor  for  two  kinds  of  plays 
particularly.  These  are  new  American  plays  and  * 
the  best  examples  of  the  recent  drama  of  Europe. 
They  have  done  surprisingly  good  work  in  pro- 
ducing both  classes.  Necessity  has  operated  with 
the  Players  only  in  one  respect  as  touching  their 
plays,  and  that  has  been  a  very  fortunate  re- 
spect. The  one-act  play,  excellent  as  it  is,  rep- 
resented necessity  to  them  in  three  ways,  in  adapt- 
ability to  the  scope  of  the  authors;  in  adaptability 
to  the  scope  of  the  actors;  and  in  comparative 
cheapness  of  production. 

When  we  come  to  strategy  Mr.  Goodman  will 


184     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

not  admit  that  it  had  any  part  in  the  selection  of 
the  plays.  I  beg  to  suggest  that  there  must  have 
been  at  any  rate  some  unconscious  strategy  in  both 
the  choice  and  placing  of  plays.  In  addition  to 
the  one-act  play  representing  necessity,  it  also 
opened  the  door  for  strategy  in  handling  an  eve- 
ning's appeal  to  the  audience.  It  has  made  it 
possible  to  provide  variety,  not  to  place  all  the 
eggs  in  one  dramatic  basket.  It  made  possible 
the  arranging  of  a  bill  from  two  points  of  view, 
the  floating  of  the  comparatively  unpopular  item 
on  a  bill  between  the  more  popular  members,  and 
the  providing  of  a  balance  of  type.  This  has  been 
partly  a  mechanical  matter,  the  balancing  of  a 
kitchen  with  a  fancy  set,  of  satire  with  serious 
plays,  of  American  with  foreign  plays.  Aside 
from  this  there  is  no  doubt  that  some  numbers  on 
bills  have  been  chosen  with  conscious  levity.  It 
probably  wasn't  difficult  to  decide  what  the  audi- 
ence would  want,  though  naturally  the  director 
makes  no  confessions  on  this  point.  A  little  wily 
placing  of  what  the  audience  would  want  over 
against  t  something  that  the  director  himself 
wanted  has  saved  for  the  Washington  Square 
Players  many  a  beautiful  piece  of  work.  It  is 
for  the  strategy  that  contrived  a  hearing  for  these 


THREE  NEW  YORK  THEATRES     185 

things  as  well  as  for  the  insight  that  I  am  thank- 
ful to  the  Players. 

I  will  end  by  naming  an  asset  and  a  danger  of 
the  Players.  The  asset  is  their  youth,  their  in- 
genuity, their  responsibility  only  to  themselves. 
These  things,  combined  with  a  rather  fascinat- 
ing common-sense  that  I  find  in  them,  have 
brought  them  to  where  they  are.  They  will  carry 
them  further  if  the  danger  doesn't  eventuate. 
The  danger  represents  the  one  point  at  which  they 
have  surrendered  to  the  temptations  of  the  com- 
mercial method.  It  has  to  do  with  the  large 
rent  they  have  to  pay  to  play  down  town.  For 
my  part  I  would  rather  see  them  pay  less  and 
make  their  audiences  seek  them  out.  There  is 
no  doubt  that  they  would  do  it. 


XI 
NEW  IDEAS  OF  CIRCUIT 

SOME  day  a  new  Declaration  of  Independence 
will  be  written  and  three  thousand  miles  of  the 
American  map  will  arise  and  say  to  an  island 
cupped  in  the  Atlantic  seaboard,  "I  am."  And 
Manhattan  will  thereafter  be  a  little  more  re- 
spectful and  considerate  of  the  demands  of  the 
country  outside.  Such,  at  any  rate,  is  the  vision 
of  some  of  the  wise  men  of  the  West  before  they 
too  journey  to  the  East  and  bow  before  the  tem- 
ples of  power. 

I  am  not  going  to  add  to  the  total  of  discus- 
sion on  "the  collapse  of  the  one-night  stand," 
and  on  the  melancholy  effect  of  the  overlordship 
of  New  York  on  the  theatre  of  the  country.  I 
refrain,  not  because  the  condition  is  not  serious 
but  because  in  very  few  respects  does  it  differ 
from  the  general  conditions  implied  in  this  book 
and  against  which  the  insurgent  theatres  have  di- 
rected their  forces.  Cities  outside  of  New  York 

have  been  the  first  noticeably  to  suffer  from  the 

186 


NEW  IDEAS  OF  CIRCUIT         187 

present  false  regime  of  the  stage.  But  they  have 
not  actually  suffered  any  more  than  New  York 
has.  The  same  stagnation  of  ideas,  the  same  dry 
rot  of  the  imagination  that  has  followed  in  the 
train  of  the  commercial  system  has  found  expres- 
sion everywhere,  in  the  village  and  in  the 
metropolis.  But  it  has  expressed  itself  in  dif- 
ferent ways.  In  the  great  centres  it  has  meant 
the  multiplying  of  theatres  and  attractions  to  lure 
the  greatest  number.  In  the  smaller  places  it 
has  meant  the  withdrawing  of  the  occasional  good 
attraction  in  favor  of  the  third  or  fourth  company 
of  some  Broadway  success  or  in  favor  of  the 
ubiquitous  motion  picture.  The  insurgent  thea- 
tres have  set  themselves  to  the  solution  of  the 
problem  in  the  small  cities  as  well  as  in  the  large. 
Outside  New  York  they  have  tried  to  fill  a  place 
too  long  vacant,  to  build  up  in  the  people  of 
small  centres  an  interest  in  the  theatre  as  a  healthy 
thing.  In  New  York  they  have  had  to  compete 
in  a  field  already  overcrowded,  to  introduce  in- 
geniously the  truer  method  in  a  field  in  which 
false  methods  had  become  the  rule. 

The  faults  of  centralized  control  and  the  travel- 
ling company  have  become  so  manifest  that  many 
have  supposed  that  the  fault  was  inherent  in  the 
system,  that  no  company  could  be  good  and  serv- 


i88      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

iceable  that  travelled  out  from  New  York.  Of 
course  that  is  not  the  case.  The  travelling  com- 
pany controlled  from  a  centre  is  perfectly  justi- 
fiable if  it  supports  the  better  order  of  the  art 
of  the  stage  in  acting,  production,  play  and  stage 
economics.  And  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should 
not  support  this  better  order  except  the  reasons 
that  lie  in  narrow  and  destructive  self-interest. 
There  are  indeed  positive  advantages  for  the  art 
of  the  stage  in  the  system  of  the  travelling  com- 
pany over  the  systems  of  the  local  repertory  and 
stock  companies.  These  never  can  and  never  will 
become  so  strong  as  to  represent  the  latest  cur- 
rents of  dramatic  art.  They  cannot  provide  the 
variety  of  motive  and  type  our  people  demand. 
The  travelling  company  could  be  a  guarantee 
that  the  best  of  the  nation  is  brought  to  the  door 
of  each  one  of  its  sections.  The  advantages  of 
economy  and  efficiency  of  the  travelling  system  are 
many  and  proper. 

Why  then  has  a  system  based  upon  travelling 
companies  been  responsible  for  so  many  of  the 
evils  under  which  the  provinces  have  been  suffer- 
ing*? Again  we  find  our  answer  in  expense  and 
profits  and  the  crux  of  the  whole  matter  is  prop- 
erty interests.  Ninety-nine  out  of  every  hundred 
theatres  in  the  country  are  now  either  owned  out- 


NEW  IDEAS  OF  CIRCUIT         189 

right  or  controlled  by  one  or  another  of  two  New 
York  theatre  interests.  By  these  interests  thea- 
tres are  handled  upon  very  clear  and  simple  prin- 
ciples. The  management  of  a  chain  of  theatres 
is  largely  a  matter  of  bookkeeping.  First,  there 
is  a  certain  small  number  of  first-rate  attractions 
that  can  be  fed  out  to  these  theatres  to  extract 
the  maximum  of  return.  The  time  is  then  filled 
in  with  duplicate  companies  of  New  York  suc- 
cesses, with  cheap  road  companies  in  musical 
comedy,  and  with  melodrama.  The  time  that 
is  left  can  be  very  profitably  used  by  motion  pic- 
tures. By  careful  studying  of  balance  sheets  it 
has  been  discovered  in  just  what  manner  the  road 
theatre  will  pay  the  greatest  returns.  No  room  is 
left  in  the  programmes  of  these  theatres  for  in- 
novations and  high-brow  experiments.  Only  oc- 
casionally are  these  profitable  and,  worse  than 
this,  they  clog  the  machine  and  promise  to  be 
troublesome  later  on.  There  is  only  one  man- 
ager of  a  string  of  theatres  in  the  country  who  is 
consistently  friendly  to  the  venturesome  spirits 
of  the  new  theatre.  The  others  exclude  them  un- 
til they  have  come  in  by  a  side  entrance,  which 
means  until  their  enterprises  show  sure  and  gen- 
erous profits. 

As  we  are  trying  not  to  deal  with  the  impossi- 


igo     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

ble  in  this  book  I  am  going  to  admit  at  the  out- 
set that  there  is  no  way  of  overcoming  this  prop- 
erty control  in  the  theatre.  If  it  cannot  be  over- 
come it  must  be  eluded.  If  you  are  a  manager 
with  a  new  idea  for  the  presentation  of  artistic 
plays, — any  manager  mentioned  in  this  book  with 
the  exception  of  Ames, — you  will  have  trouble 
getting  time  in  the  theatres.  If  for  one  reason 
or  another  you  are  intent  on  taking  your  plays 
over  the  country  you  will  probably  try  to  invent  a 
system  of  your  own  by  which  this  may  be  done 
without  dependence  on  the  machinery  of  the  es- 
tablished theatre.  This  is  precisely  what  has 
been  done. 

The  problem  goes  back  to  two  questions. 
Where  shall  we  play  and  where  shall  we  get  the 
local  machinery  for  the  spread  of  information  and 
the  sale  of  tickets'?  The  last  ten  years  have  seen 
some  interesting  answers  to  these  questions.  For 
they  have  seen  certain  substitutes,  college  cam- 
puses, town  halls,  chapels,  drawing-rooms,  take 
the  place  of  theatres,  and  clubs,  colleges  and 
leagues  take  the  place  of  the  local  machinery. 

Ben  Greet  had  a  large  share  in  showing  us 
that  we  are  not  absolutely  dependent  either  upon 
theatres  or  the  machinery  of  theatrical  publicity 
for  the  support  of  productions.  In  England  the 


NEW  IDEAS  OF  CIRCUIT         191 

custom  of  playing  in  town  halls  and  village 
greens  was  never  quite  lost.  Some  of  the  best 
English  stock  companies,  Benson's  for  example, 
have  maintained  only  the  most  delicate  relation 
with  the  professional  theatre.  Their  real  sup- 
port lay  in  the  civic  and  social  institutions  of  the 
provinces. 

When  Ben  Greet  came  out  of  England  with 
"Everyman"  he  proceeded  to  throw  its  support 
on  the  shoulders  of  new  institutions.  He  recog- 
nized the  interest  this  play  had  for  students  of 
literature  and  so  he  appealed  to  colleges  to  sup- 
port it  and  they  did  so.  He  had  presented 
"Everyman"  first  at  a  college  hall.  And  with 
this  play  he  first  definitely  aligned  the  universi- 
ties of  this  country  with  the  machinery  of  guaran- 
tee and  support  of  theatrical  enterprises.  The 
significance  of  this  innovation  cannot  be  over- 
estimated. His  next  step  after  creating  the  col- 
lege support  was  to  leave  the  established  theatres 
and  play  Shakespeare  and  the  old  comedies  on 
the  campuses  of  the  colleges.  Thus  was  the  new 
system  of  circuit  introduced. 

The  system  inaugurated  by  Ben  Greet  was 
taken  up  and  pushed  to  completeness  in  this  coun- 
try by  C.  D.  Coburn.  It  was  he  who  first  visual- 
ized the  situation  and  the  opportunity.  Ten 


192      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

years  ago  he  outlined  a  system  which  has  meant 
the  establishing  of  the  theatrical  circuit  upon  the 
basis  of  the  institutions  and  understandings  of 
educated  people.  The  thing  came  to  Coburn  first 
in  the  form  of  the  problem  of  the  artist.  How 
was  the  artist  to  secure  that  variety  in  training 
and  that  independence  in  production  that  was 
necessary  to  him*?  The  way  was  closed  in  stock 
and  on  Broadway.  After  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Coburn 
had  had  several  years'  experience  in  stock  com- 
panies the  solution  came  to  them  through  a  few 
productions  given  in  the  open-air.  "Why  not 
organize  the  colleges,  in  which  the  dramatic  in- 
terest was  strong  but  unfused  and  futile,  into 
a  University  Theatre  Association1?"  Coburn 
wrote  a  pamphlet  for  this,  he  lectured  and  sent 
out  agents,  and  succeeded  in  enlisting  a  few  col- 
leges. The  colleges  were  to  supply  the  machin- 
ery, the  students  and  college  community  were 
to  supply  the  audience,  and  the  theatre  was  to  be 
on  the  campus  or  in  a  college  hall.  The  entree 
to  the  colleges  was  secured  through  Percy  Mac- 
Kaye's  "Canterbury  Pilgrims"  which  was  inter- 
esting to  colleges  on  account  of  its  association 
with  Chaucer.  The  first  summer  they  played 
in  nine  colleges.  Summer  by  summer  the  num- 
ber grew  and  as  the  circuit  grew  the  repertory  grew 


NEW  IDEAS  OF  CIRCUIT         193 

as  well.  This  was  always  taken  from  the  works 
of  Shakespeare  or  other  classical  dramatists. 
Then,  in  1911,  Gilbert  Murray's  "Electra"  from 
Euripides  was  added. 

Mr.  Coburn  counts  the  advantages  of  this  sys- 
tem of  circuit  to  be  many-sided.  It  has  provided 
for  the  colleges  excellent  productions  of  great 
plays  in  beautiful  natural  surroundings.  For  the 
stage  it  has  represented  the  persistence  of  the  tra- 
dition of  the  classical  play.  For  the  artist  it  has 
provided  an  opportunity  to  train  himself  in  the 
way  Irving  and  Booth  were  trained,  in  the  mas- 
terpieces of  the  world's  drama. 

The  circuits  of  the  colleges  have  been  built 
only  by  soul-trying  energy  on  the  part  of  central 
offices.  As  first  outlined  Mr.  Coburn  thought  of 
a  self-governing  federation  but  this  idea  proved 
impracticable.  As  time  has  passed  the  lines  of 
the  circuit  have  been  drawn  together  until  to- 
day there  is  in  the  Middle  States  a  solid  and  grow- 
ing constituency.  People  are  learning  to  look 
apart  from  the  theatre  for  some  of  their  best 
theatrical  fare.  Moreover  there  is  being  trained 
a  set  of  local  agencies  for  the  handling  of  these 
productions.  It  does  not  require  a  very  rich  im- 
agination to  see  in  the  not  distant  future  a  thea- 
trical edifice  for  travelling  companies  built  upon  a 


194     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

better    foundation    than    that    of    short-sighted 
profits. 

Within  the  last  two  years  there  has  been  worked 
out  another  ingenious  scheme  for  outwitting  the 
disadvantages  of  touring  in  classical  and  new-idea 
plays.  So  successful  was  this  venture  that  its 
originator  found  himself  immediately  welcome 
upon  the  stages  for  which  his  own  platforms  had 
been  provided  as  substitutes.  Like  C.  D.  Coburn, 
Stuart  Walker  is  a  trained  showman  with  an 
artist's  itch  to  do  what  pleases  himself  and  to 
keep  growing.  While  Coburn  attaches  himself 
to  the  classical  codes  Walker  has  allied  himself 
with  the  newer  fashions  of  stage  art.  But  his 
problem  was  the  same.  How  was  he  to  get  an 
opportunity  to  try  these  things  out  and  to  make 
them  support  themselves*?  Walker  had  had 
enough  experience  with  astute  managers  to  know 
that  the  best  entrance  to  the  theatre  is  the  side 
door,  so  he  proceeded  to  find  one. 

I  should  say  that  Walker's  chief  quality  in 
the  theatre  is  a  playful  and  childlike  art.  His  are 
not  children's  plays  but  that  rudimentary  brand 
by  which  the  true  principle  of  art  is  distinguished 
from  its  more  sophisticated  show;  fancy  in  pro- 
duction, by  which  all  the  factors  of  the  produc- 


NEW  IDEAS  OF  CIRCUIT         195 

tion,  stage,  scenery,  costumes,  story,  and  lights,  are 
handled  by  the  free  imagination  of  the  producer 
instead  of  by  the  principles  of  imitation.  And 
Walker's  chief  passion  was  lights.  There  had 
been  much  talk  about  lights  on  the  stage  but  there 
were  few  artists  of  lights  and  few  good  lighting 
systems.  Walker  wished  to  make  himself  a  mas- 
ter of  these  things. 

Now  there  was  no  more  an  open  door  at  the 
manager's  office  for  this  sort  of  thing  than  there 
was  for  Shakespeare  and  Moliere  and  Euripides. 
And  so,  as  the  theatres  were  closed,  Walker 
thought  of  a  little  substitute  by  which  he  could 
have  all  the  satisfaction  of  experiment  with  little 
expense.  I  do  not  know  that  he  knew  of  the  little 
portable  stages  that  have  been  carried  around  in 
England,  nor  of  M.  Gemier's  portable  theatre  in 
France  which  was  hauled  around  by  a  traction 
engine.  At  any  rate  his  portmanteau  stage  was 
something  of  an  adaptation  of  what  had  been  and 
was  even  more  largely  original,  being  enriched  by 
the  principles  of  the  new  staging,  by  the  builder's 
own  fancy,  and  by  a  very  complete  lighting  sys- 
tem. This  little  stage  was  set  up  on  July  14th, 
1915,  in  Christadora  Settlement  House,  147 
Avenue  B,  in  three  little  plays  of  the  manager's 
own  composition. 


196      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Here  was  another  expedient  for  the  new  cir- 
cuit. As  Greet  and  Coburn  had  found  theirs  in 
the  open-air,  Walker  found  his  in  a  little  exten- 
sible box,  "  a  theatre  that  comes  to  you,"  per- 
fectly equipped  as  a  stage,  which  could  be  set  up 
anywhere,  in  drawing  rooms,  in  halls,  or  on  the 
stages  of  theatres.  The  success  of  the  first  per- 
formance opened  up  the  next  opportunity  for 
circuit.  In  referring  to  Walker's  success  with 
his  little  collapsible  stage  I  am  disposed  to  give 
a  large  share  of  credit  to  the  managers  who  set 
themselves  to  work  to  create  for  him  a  circuit. 
Messrs.  Elser  and  Janney  had  before  them  the 
work  that  had  been  done  by  others  in  creating 
collegiate  circuits.  But  in  large  measure  these 
were  not  available.  They  had  to  build  up  new 
circuits  from  the  ground.  Taking  clubs,  drama 
league  centres  and  colleges  as  a  nucleus  they  gath- 
ered together  local  groups  and  then  knit  these  with 
each  other  for  the  purposes  of  a  continuous  tour. 
This  is  work  that  cannot  be  scamped.  Sometimes 
it  was  necessary  that  the  advance  man  see  and 
talk  personally  with  a  hundred  people  in  a  day  en- 
listing interest,  explaining,  justifying  and  persuad- 
ing. I  mention  this  side  of  the  work  in  order  to 
show  that  this  is  one  necessary  and  difficult  fea- 
ture in  the  building  of  new  circuits,  However 


NEW  IDEAS  OF  CIRCUIT         197 

excellent  the  company  may  be  its  value  counts  for 
nothing  if  this  engineering  work  is  neglected. 

A  short  season  the  first  year,  a  longer  and 
successful  season  the  second  year  in  plays  by 
Dunsany,  Walker  and  others,  showed  what  might 
be  done  with  this  idea.  The  guarantee  system  of 
local  support  had  abundantly  proved  itself.  It 
supplied  not  only  the  sinews  of  money,  but  it 
provided  as  well  a  group  in  each  city  of  friendly 
and  helpful  people  who  had  informed  themselves 
on  the  facts  of  the  undertaking  and  were  pre- 
pared to  be  pleased.  Coburn  and  Walker  have 
proved  other  advantages  in  this  system.  It  has 
been  found  possible  to  give  excellent  productions 
at  a  far  lower  expenditure  of  money  than  is  usual 
on  the  professional  stage.  As  the  productions 
represent  a  new  idea  at  the  centre  of  which  lies 
art  rather  than  profits  audiences  have  been  glad 
to  respond  to  the  imaginations  of  the  producers 
in  staging.  And  these  have  brought  out  some 
really  remarkable  examples  of  beauty  and  econ- 
omy. The  natural  harmonies  of  the  open  air,  the 
possibilities  of  beauty  in  lighted  horizon  cloths 
and  painted  draperies  have  been  fully  utilized  and 
to  the  complete  satisfaction  of  the  audiences. 

The  door  thus  opened  by  these  experimenters 
is  an  important  one.  It  should  not  be  closed. 


ig8     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

The  idea  with  which  Coburn  started  in  his  Uni- 
versity Theatre  was  a  large  and  true  idea.  There 
are  institutions  in  existence  which  should  be  of 
broader  service  to  the  theatre  than  they  have  been. 
This  obligation  rests  particularly  on  the  educa- 
tional institution.  For  the  sake  of  their  own 
patrons,  as  well  as  in  the  service  of  their  purpose 
in  society,  they  will  need  to  take  a  larger  part 
in  the  support,  financial  and  critical,  of  the  better 
.  efforts  in  the  theatre.  Since  the  Coburns  started 
other  institutions  have  entered  the  field.  The 
Drama  League  has  it  in  its  power  through  its  local 
centres  to  be  of  the  greatest  service  in  arranging 
guaranteed  tours  for  companies  that  are  resolutely 
doing  good  things.  Lately  the  Lyceum  Bureaus, 
always  ready  to  recognize  a  new  trend,  have  en- 
tered the  field.  What  is  needed  is  an  organiza- 
tion which  will  take  off  the  hands  of  each  com- 
pany the  necessity  of  building  up  its  own  organ- 
ization. For  this  the  Drama  League  is  well 
equipped  mechanically  if  not  in  temper.  For 
such  an  organization  to  be  the  outgrowth  of  the 
educational  systems  of  the  country  would  mean 
a  great  deal  both  to  schools  and  drama.  And  it 
would  throw  in  the  way  of  some  of  the  newer  cir- 
cuiting companies  assistance  that  would  greatly 
aid  in  their  work. 


XII 
THE  NEW  ADVENTURE 

THERE  has  been  more  in  these  new  theatres  scat- 
tered over  the  country  than  appears  on  the  sur- 
face. To  many  they  have  offered  the  zest  of 
new  adventure,  of  wayfaring  in  social  experiment. 
The  difficulties  themselves  stirred  the  interest, 
and  the  fact  that  there  was  no  purpose  of  utility 
was  a  source  of  satisfaction.  More  than  any- 
thing else  these  theatres  provided  activity  which 
was  its  own  justification  and  its  own  reward. 
After  years  of  good  intentions  there  was  real 
pleasure  in  forgetting  destinations  for  awhile  and 
simply  doing. 

The  first  group  of  the  little  theatres  came  about 
1911  and  1912.  The  second  and  larger  crop 
came  three  years  later  in  1915.  The  second 
group  depended  upon  all  that  had  been  learned  of 
the  pioneers.  In  the  establishment  of  the  later 
theatres  there  has  been  put  forth  a  great  deal  of 
sound  sense.  We  do  not  find  young  men  and 
women  again  attacking  the  tremendous  problems 

199 


200     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

that  fascinated  the  beginners.  And  there  has 
come  into  the  work  a  group  who  have  had  better 
tuition.  Men  of  professional  training  who  be- 
fore despised  the  little  theatres  are  now  glad  to 
enter  their  service.  The  graduates  of  the  earlier 
organizations  have  gone  out  to  take  leading  places 
in  the  new.  And  several  have  come  back  to 
America  after  work  in  Berlin  and  Moscow  and 
Florence. 

It  is  strange  how  rapidly  the  sanction  for  this 
sort  of  thing  grew.  Soon  it  became  possible  to 
admit  you  were  interested  in  the  new  ideas  of 
the  theatre  without  seeming  to  be  a  fool  or  a  social 
highwayman.  And  the  resources  rapidly  in- 
creased. Every  city  found  numbers  of  actors 
well  enough  equipped,  some  artists  who  were 
willing  to  turn  their  hands  to  the  new  art,  and 
some  experienced  directors.  Playwrights  who 
had  needed  but  the  slightest  encouragement  be- 
gan to  turn  out  novel  little  plays  for  home  con- 
sumption. 

In  respect  of  organization  the  later  theatres 
have  learned  from  the  pioneers.  When  these 
theatres  started  the  whole  thing  may  have  gone 
back  to  some  individual,  self-elected,  with  the 
command  upon  him.  Through  faults  of  his  tem- 
perament and  also  through  the  misfortunes  of  his 


THE  NEW  ADVENTURE         201 

position  as  pioneer  that  individual  was  seldom 
able  to  maintain  an  organization.  We  have  seen 
that  success  has  come  to  some  organizations 
through  their  ability  to  put  up  a  united  face  to 
the  community.  Just  as  surely  failure  has  come 
without  that  ability.  The  newer  societies  learned 
from  the  pioneers  how  to  secure  this  united  front. 
They  learned  that  however  important  it  was  to 
have  a  director  with  ideals  and  vision  it  was  quite 
as  important  to  have  a  committee  management 
to  represent  him  before  the  community.  It  has 
become  axiomatic  that  no  individual  can  stand 
alone  in  this  business.  The  attempt  to  do  so 
breaks  the  back  every  time.  Society  has  a  cruel 
if  efficacious  way  of  testing  the  stamina  of  those 
who  would  be  her  instruments. 

The  means  by  which  this  mass  backing  is  se- 
cured differs  in  different  places.  Sometimes  the 
theatre  attaches  itself  to  a  social  institution  al- 
ready established.  In  this  way  in  ujj-6  the 
Brooklyn  Institute  was  used  as  the  paternal  or- 
ganization for  the  founding  of  the  JSrookljn 
Repertory  Theatre.  Universities  and  art  insti- 
tutes have  lent  their  strength  for  this  purpose  in 
some  cases.  By  all  odds  the  best  organization  for 
this  use  is  one  which  has  already  been  busying  it- 
self in  the  activities  of  applied  art.  To  this  class 


202      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

belongs  the  very  vigorous  and  promising  theatre 
of  the  Arts  and  Crafts  Guild  of  Detroit.  This 
theatre  has  been  so  carefully  thought  out,  it  has 
been  so  fortunate  in  its  associations  and  support 
that  it  warrants  careful  consideration. 

In  1915  Mr.  Sam  Hume  was  called  to  Detroit 
to  direct  the  opening  production  in  an  open-air 
theatre  built  on  the  estate  of  Mr.  George  C.  Booth. 
Out  of  the  Cranbrook  Masque  prepared  by  Mr. 
Hume  for  this  theatre  developed  an  association 
between  Mr.  Hume  and  the  Detroit  Society  of 
Arts  and  Crafts  which  is  in  many  respects  the 
most  promising  in  the  recent  movements  for  local 
theatres.  These  promising  features  refer  to  a 
combination  of  circumstances,  chief  of  which  were 
the  history  of  Mr.  Hume  and  the  purpose  of  the 
Society.  Mr.  Hume  had  been  a  California  man, 
a  student  at  Harvard  under  Baker,  and  later  a 
worker  with  Craig  in  Florence.  All  along  a  dili- 
gent student  of  the  new  staging  he  had  been  re- 
sponsible for  that  exhibition  of  the  new  stage- 
craft which  had  introduced  this  art  to  America. 
He  was  now  ready  for  such  a  call  as  the  Society 
of  Arts  and  Crafts  would  make. 

On  its  side  this  Society  was  a  vigorous,  well- 
established  and  supported  organization  of  crafts- 
men and  artists  then  in  its  tenth  year.  It  had  long 


THE  NEW  ADVENTURE         203 

carried  on  some  work  in  historic  costume,  design 
and  setting,  and  was  now  ready  for  a  more  par- 
ticular work.  Out  of  the  association  between  the 
Society  and  Mr.  Hume  there  first  came  a  little 
theatre  seating  two  hundred  or  more  which  was 
turned  over  by  friends  rent  free  to  the  theatre  of 
the  Arts  and  Crafts  Society  for  its  work.  The 
first  year's  work  was  carefully  organized  accord- 
ing to  principles  worked  out  by  the  director.  Mr. 
Hume  holds  strictly  to  the  idea  of  the  reduction 
of  factors  to  their  simplest  terms.  In  his  first 
statement  he  made  this  clear.  "We  believe  it 
wiser  to  start  with  the  demand,  and  let  our  or- 
ganization and  number  of  performances  expand 
as  the  demand  increases,  rather  than  to  begin 
with  the  imagined  demand  which  would  leave 
us  at  the  end  of  the  season  with  a  debt." 
Again  he  says,  "I  do  not  look  upon  the  Little 
Theatre  as  a  laboratory  where  a  few  people 
work  out  their  own  personal  and  usually  very 
queer  and  highly  specialized  ideas,  but  a  theatre 
which,  to  justify  its  existence,  must  establish 
some  definite  point  of  contact  with  community 
life." 

The  management  of  the  theatre  has  been  based 
closely  on  these  principles.  Two  performances 
are  scheduled  for  each  play.  If  more  perform- 


204      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

ances  are  demanded  this  demand  must  be  clearly 
shown.  Work  in  the  theatre  is  entirely  volun- 
tary. There  is  no  expense  for  salaries  outside 
the  director's  fee.  The  audience  is  made  up  at 
present  of  400  subscribers  who  have  engaged 
themselves  for  a  certain  sum.  Costumes  and  set- 
tings are  made  at  the  theatre  in  connection  with 
the  workshops  of  the  Arts  and  Crafts  Society. 
Indicating  the  scrupulous  economy  practiced  it 
may  be  noticed  that  each  production  is  made  at 
an  average  cost  of  $800  as  compared  with  the 
cost  per  production  of  $1500  for  the  Neighbor- 
hood Playhouse  and  the  Washington  Square 
Players. 

Though  himself  an  actor  and  writer  Mr. 
Hume's  chief  interest  lies  in  the  design  side  of 
the  stage,  and  his  theatre  shows  up  better  on  this 
side  than  in  its  list  of  plays.  The  repertory, 
though  interesting,  is  not  distinguished.  But  this 
cannot  be  said  of  the  settings.  Hume's  handling 
under  different  patterns  of  set  pilons  on  the  stage, 
his  treatment  of  symbolical  and  light  effects  are 
among  the  most  practical  and  at  the  same  time 
imaginative  specimens  of  the  new  staging  art  in 
America. 

I  know  no  other  case  of  a  theatre  so  fortunate 
as  the  Detroit  Theatre  of  Arts  and  Crafts  for  as- 


THE  NEW  ADVENTURE          205 

sociation  with  an  artist's  guild.  Most  other  thea- 
tres have  to  create  their  own  supporting  organ- 
izations and  to  draw  together  for  themselves  the 
artists  who  will  make  the  productions.  But  if 
the  organization  must  be  made  to  order  I  can  im- 
agine no  greater  source  of  strength  than  to  have 
this  limited  to  those  who  take  part,  to  have  no 
governing  machinery  or  committees  representing 
mere  administration,  and  to  expect  no  support 
and  to  permit  no  interest  except  upon  the  part 
of  those  who  were  drawn  together  by  delight  in 
the  thing  being  done.  This  principle  limits  the 
civic  and  business  activities  of  the  enterprise  but 
it  conduces  to  good  work. 

We  have  heard  a  great  deal  about  joy  in  art 
and  the  play  motive.  The  advantage  of  these 
is  that  they  are  free  and  that  they  are  without 
purpose.  Impelled  perhaps  by  reaction  against 
the  mean  utility  of  the  professional  stage,  a  util- 
ity that  has  destroyed  the  imagination  throughout 
its  fabric,  and  as  much  by  a  reaction  against  the 
intense  purposefulness  of  many  reform  move- 
ments, some  organizations  have  come  together 
simply  as  playing  groups  of  artists.  There  is  a  > 
self-sufficiency  about  these  that  is  refreshing. 
They  make  no  appeal  to  audiences,  they  do  not 
advertise,  in  many  cases  they  make  it  as  difficult 


206     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

as  possible  to  secure  tickets.  But  their  inde- 
pendence proves  an  asset  for  them. 

Among  players  of  this  type  by  all  odds  the 
most  successful  are  the  Provincetown  Players. 
They  are  successful  simply  because  they  are  in- 
dividual, free,  and  not  anxious;  because  they  do 
all  the  work  themselves  and  are  satisfied  when 
they  have  pleased  themselves.  These  players  find 
their  justification  in  their  own  faith  and  impulse. 
They  have  played  one  season  in  a  little  private 
theatre  in  Washington  Square,  and  they  show  no 
present  signs  of  going  up  town  to  appeal  to  the 
many.  In  this  season  they  did  twenty-four  new 
plays,  many  of  which  were  distinguished  by  idea 
and  some  few  approached  excellence  as  plays. 

Of  somewhat  the  same  order  are  the  Vagabond 
Players  of  Baltimore  who  opened  November  2, 
1916,  in  a  little  theatre  seating  sixty-two  made 
out  of  a  former  bar-room  in  the  St.  James  Hotel. 
In  the  first  season  fifteen  plays  were  given.  All 
expenses  were  covered  by  playing  twice  a  week 
with  a  new  bill  every  month. 

The  Little  Playhouse  Theatre  of  St.  Louis  is 
something  like  the  Detroit  theatre  on  account  of 
its  association  with  an  artists'  guild,  though  in 
this  case  the  bonds  of  association  are  very  slight. 
The  St.  Louis  Little  Playhouse,  directed  by  Clin- 


THE  NEW  ADVENTURE         207 

ton  J.  Masseck  and  Melville  Burke,  was  organ- 
ized to  produce  plays  in  1916  under  a  supporting 
organization  called  the  St.  Louis  Society  for  the 
Promotion  of  Drama.  After  an  unfortunate 
opening  in  some  highly  intense  plays  of  the  earlier 
styles  of  the  modern  theatre  movement  this  thea- 
tre fell  into  its  stride  and  promises  an  interesting 
career. 

One  of  the  older  of  the  little  theatres  of  the 
country  is  the  one  managed  under  the  Little  Thea- 
tre Society  of  Indiana.  This  theatre  society  was 
established  in  1914  at  about  the  time  the  patron- 
age idea  was  strong  among  the  little  theatres.  On 
its  governing  board  it  has  had  some  of  the  best 
known  names  of  Indiana's  art  and  literature.  It 
has  been  well  provided  with  subscribers  and  sus- 
taining members.  No  city  in  the  country  is  bet- 
ter equipped^for  the  support  of  such  an  organiza- 
tion. But  trier  little  theatre  has  fallen  short 
through  the  fact  that  it  has  been  too  heavily  ad- 
ministered, that  it  has  failed  to  draw  together  a 
voluntary  group  of  artists,  and  has  not  always  had 
responsible  direction.  The  theatre  has  no  home, 
its  performances  having  been  given  in  the  John 
Herron  Art  Institute  and  in  scattered  auditoriums. 
The  repertory  gives  an  appearance  of  accident  and 
confusion. 


208      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

Los  Angeles  has  had  several  experiences  with 
little  theatres  and  none  of  these  has  been  for- 
tunate. In  December,  1913,  a  professional  stock 
company  was  called  together  under  the  title  the 
Little  Theatre.  As  the  company  was  an  expen- 
sive one  the  venture  hardly  lasted  two  months. 
In  the  fall  of  1916  Miss  Aline  Barnsdall  gathered 
together  a  good  company  in  which  Richard 
Ordynski  was  a  leading  figure.  An  expensive 
production  was  made  of  Ossip  Dymow's  "Nju" 
with  which  Ordynski' s  connection  with  the  thea- 
tre ceased.  After  a  few  weeks  of  further  experi- 
ment this  theatre  also  closed  its  doors.  Neither 
one  of  these  was  a  little  theatre  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  word,  and  under  the  conditions  of 
expense  with  which  they  started  there  was  no 
possibility  of  success.  After  leaving  the  Little 
Theatre  of  Los  Angeles  Ordynski  produced 
"Everyman"  in  that  city  under  other  auspices,  and 
then  returned  to  New  York  for  a  short  engage- 
ment at  the  Bandbox  in  Dymow's  play,  which 
was  no  more  successful  in  New  York  than  it  had 
been  in  the  West. 

Some  of  these  new  theatres  follow  the  system 
of  the  old  amateur  clubs  in  organization  while 
presenting  the  newer  and  experimental  plays. 
Such  is  the  Kansas  City  Comedy  club  under  the 


THE  NEW  ADVENTURE          209 

direction  of  Marcus  Ford.  For  a  record  of  ac- 
tivity we  can  find  little  to  excel  that  of  the  Play- 
ers of  Providence,  Rhode  Island.  This  club  is 
a  successor  to  the  famous  old  amateur  club  of  that 
city,  the  Talma  Club,  the  record  of  whose  per- 
formances goes  back  to  1887.  The  number  of 
the  plays  presented  by  the  Talma  Club  reached 
over  a  hundred.  The  Players  were  established 
in  1909  and  until  the  sale  of  their  theatre  played 
in  the  private  Talma  Theatre.  In  eight  seasons 
they  have  given  92  regular  performances  of  53 
different  plays  including  many  of  the  strategic 
plays  of  the  modern  movement. 

Active  theatres  are  found  to-day  in  cities  all 
over  the  country.  The  Little  Theatre  Players  of 
Denver  were  established  in  1915  under  the  direc- 
tion of  Granville  F.  Sturgis,  who  had  also  been 
active  in  little  theatre  work  in  Los  Angeles. 
After  a  company  had  been  opened  in  Cincinnati  in 
1913  and  had  discontinued  for  want  of  support 
Mrs.  Helen  Schuster-Martin  in  1915  began  work 
in  a  larger  way  by  providing  a  building  and  a 
corps  of  efficient  helpers.  This  Little  Playhouse 
has  now  been  in  existence  two  seasons  and  has 
prospered  in  good  plays.  In  addition  to  the  Play- 
house of  the  Wisconsin  Players  Milwaukee  had 
for  some  years  a  little  theatre  under  the  direction 


210     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

of  Mrs.  J.  A.  Stewart.  In  1916  there  was  prom- 
ised a  little  theatre  building  for  Cleveland.  As  a 
result  of  a  change  of  plans  an  old  church  has  been 
remodelled  for  a  home  for  the  Cleveland  Little 
Theatre.  The  most  distinctive  work  done  for 
this  group  under  the  direction  of  Mr.  Eugene 
O'Neill  has  been  in  puppet  plays. 

As  far  back  as  November  17,  1914,  the  local 
centre  of  the  Drama  League  of  Duluth  had 
opened  a  little  theatre  building  of  its  own.  In 
this  theatre  there  have  been  for  each  season  an 
average  of  six  little  theatre  productions  under  a 
good  local  company  expertly  managed  by  Mrs.  F. 
A.  Patrick  and  other  capable  workers.  A  little 
theatre  that  promised  good  things  for  a  small  city 
was  the  Prairie  Playhouse  opened  at  Galesburg, 
Illinois,  in  1915  by  Mr.  Jesse  Crafton.  Prob- 
ably no  theatre  in  a  small  town  has  attacked  with 
more  wisdom  and  idealism  the  peculiar  problems 
of  its  position  than  did  this  little  theatre  during 
its  first  two  seasons.  Another  little  theatre  in  a 
small  town  has  been  Mr.  George  McCallum's 
private  theatre  in  Northampton,  Mass.  Mr.  Mc- 
Callum  has  expended  money  on  this  in  the  same 
way  that  other  men  have  spent  money  on  first  edi- 
tions and  pictures.  He  engaged  an  art  director 


THE  NEW  ADVENTURE         211 

and  spared  no  pains  in  securing  the  most  exquisite 
beauty  in  his  productions. 

The  list  of  little  theatre  companies  could  be  in- 
definitely prolonged  and  still  I  should  miss  some. 
In  January,  1917,  Mr.  William  B.  Button  organ- 
ized the  Little  Theatre  Players  of  Rochester,  New 
York.  Little  theatres  are  conducted  or  have  been 
projected  at  Nashville,  Erie,  Richmond  Hill, 
Brownsville,  Portland  (Oregon),  East  Orange, 
Salt  Lake  City,  and  Pittsburgh.  In  New  York 
there  was  for  a  time  the  promise  of  the  Nine 
O'Clock  Theatre,  most  dainty  of  small  theatres; 
there  are  the  Morningside  Players  who  come  out 
of  Columbia  University,  the  East  and  West  Play- 
ers with  a  programme  of  Yiddish  plays;  and  the 
Bramhall  Theatre,  exponent  of  the  work  of  one 
man. 

This  latter  institution  commands  a  respectful 
consideration,  little  as  I  am  able  to  place  it.  It 
has  in  it  all  the  flavor  of  a  personal  adventure  on 
the  part  of  its  director,  Butler  Davenport.  Like 
some  of  the  earlier  and  less  successful  ventures  in 
theatrical  pioneering  the  Bramhall  Theatre  de- 
pends upon  the  crusading  spirit  in  one  man.  And 
that  man  provides  an  unusual  combination  of 
qualities.  Many  of  these  have  in  them  more  of 


212      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

the  American  stamp  than  the  usual  run  of  qualities 
that  have  led  to  little  theatres  in  this  country. 
With  these  qualities  Davenport  has  endowed  his 
little  theatre,  a  New  England  Americanism,  almost 
a  Colonial  intensity  of  purpose,  a  business  acumen 
capable  of  supporting  an  expensive  venture  for 
unselfish  ends,  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  situa- 
tion of  the  theatre,  as  well  as  an  expert  manage- 
ment of  all  of  its  factors. 

Mr.  Davenport  began  this  work  about  1912 
when  he  erected  on  his  estate  near  Stamford  a 
theatre  dedicated  to  new  American  plays.  He 
says  that  only  accidentally  did  he  become  a  play- 
wright, through  his  desire  to  find  plays  of  a  cer- 
tain truthful  type.  In  1915  he  built  himself  a 
theatre  in  2yth  Street,  New  York,  which  is  a 
model  of  all  the  tiny  theatre  building  should  be. 
This  he  has  been  quietly  conducting  ever  since. 
In  plays  Mr.  Davenport  clings  to  the  play  of 
"theme,"  this  usually  derived  from  a  well-ob- 
served American  characteristic.  In  acting  and 
conducting  he  depends  upon  a  beautiful  natural- 
ism. I  can  find  some  fault  with  his  plays  and  his 
system  of  organization,  but  I  can  find  no  fault 
with  his  acting  or  with  his  productions. 

I  name  no  further  theatres  not  because  they  do 
not  exist  but  because  I  must  stop  somewhere.  It 


THE  NEW  ADVENTURE         213 

has  not  been  my  purpose  to  iterate  the  details  but 
to  attempt  to  give  some  background  for  move- 
ments that  may  have  appeared  tangled.  So  I  can 
say  nothing  of  the  often  promised  Irish  Theatre  of 
America,  of  the  Woman's  National  Theatre,  of 
the  projected  American  People's  Theatre,  of  the 
new  Sylvan  Theatre  lately  completed  in  Washing- 
ton as  the  first  theatre  of  any  type  maintained  on 
its  own  grounds  by  the  government  of  the  United 
States,  or  of  the  Forest  Theatre  at  Carmel-by-the- 
Sea.  In  the  spring  of  1917  there  comes  the  an- 
nouncement of  the  Greenwich  Village  Theatre  in 
New  York  City.  Carefully  studied  in  plan,  with 
the  promise  of  a  good  building  and  good  facilities, 
the  venture  offers  some  hope  of  success. 


XIII 
ART  AND  OUTLOOK 

WILL  the  insurgent  theatre  last?  Do  you  ap- 
prove of  its  plays'?  What  about  the  acting? 
Should  scenery  dominate?  These  are  questions 
one  continually  meets  in  considering  the  recent 
events  in  the  theatre.  Perhaps  all  the  questions 
are  involved  in  the  first,  for  plays,  acting,  and 
scenery  are  but  parts  of  the  general  idea  for  which 
the  insurgent  theatre  has  stood,  not  to  be  defended 
by  themselves  but  as  factors  of  a  larger  whole. 

One  thing  is  certain,  and  this  answers  as  well 
those  who  ask  whether  the  insurgent  theatre  is 
against  professionalism  on  the  stage.  The  theatre 
like  everything  else  tends  to  order.  The  insur- 
gent movements  have  not  been  against  order. 
They  have  not  been  in  favor  of  slipshod  methods, 
poor  acting,  bad  balance  of  the  parts  to  the  whole, 
puerile  plays.  They  have  accepted  these  and 
many  other  disadvantages,  such  as  debts,  and  hard 
work  and  misunderstanding,  as  prices  they  had  to 
pay  for  something  that  had  to  be  done.  No  one 

214 


ART  AND  OUTLOOK  215 

needs  to  think  that  any  of  the  directors,  however 
misguided  he  may  have  been,  enjoyed  bad  acting 
and  half-baked  plays.  But  they  enjoyed  bad  act- 
ing, if  artistically  impelled,  better  than  "good" 
acting  under  the  artificial  conditions  that  had  been 
forced  on  the  actor.  If  in  destroying  the  theatre 
they  had  to  begin  again  at  the  beginning  and  build 
it  up  painfully  through  crudities  and  failure,  ex- 
periment and  adjustment,  they  were  willing  to 
doit. 

And  that  is  what  they  have  been  doing.  They 
have  never  rested  for  one  moment  content  with 
an  imperfection.  They  could  not  do  so  if  they 
would,  the  competition  being  so  strong.  They 
have  been  quick  to  use  the  dead  bodies  of  their 
comrades  as  scaling  stones,  these  young  idealists. 
Let  no  one  tell  me  that  the  impulse  to  money  is  the 
only  driving  power.  We  have  seen  enough  of 
other  impulses  in  the  last-  five  years.  He  must 
have  been  impatient  indeed  who  could  complain 
of  the  situation  in  these  movements.  For  as  fast 
as  a  fault  was  found  someone  would  correct  it. 
As  fast  as  a  new  scheme  was  thought  of  a  machine 
was  created  to  exploit  it.  The  theatre  has  not 
seen  so  much  activity  in  years  as  the  little  theatres 
have  provided. 

And    they   have    all    been   definitely   tending 


216     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

toward  order.  Will  they  call  this  new  order  pro- 
fessionalism? They  may  if  they  please  for  if  it 
isn't  professionalism  the  difference  is  only  that  be- 
tween tweedledum  and  tweedledee.  For  order 
demands  machinery  and  machinery  is  run  by  law. 
To  serve  the  great  mass  of  our  people,  whether 
you  give  them  the  new  art  or  the  old,  requires  or- 
ganization, it  requires  the  showman's  instinct,  that 
keen  knowledge  of  the  heart  of  men  that  makes 
one  know  them  and  serve  them  well.  Let  us  only 
ask  that  they  be  served  well,  and  it  will  make  no 
difference  whether  by  professional  or  not. 

It  has  been  by  subjecting  themselves  to  the 
tenets  of  order  that  the  best  of  the  new  theatres 
have  taken  their  leading  positions.  We  have  seen 
that  some  have  been  unable  to  stand  the  test  of 
common  sense.  The  theatre  demands  a  better 
balance  between  the  centrifugal  and  the  centrip- 
etal forces  than  any  other  business.  One  needs 
to  keep  the  "cosmic  reach"  and  yet  one  mustn't 
fly  off.  The  test  may  come  in  the  form  of  a  road 
tour,  a  new  building,  or  the  whisper  of  ambition 
in  association  with  great  powers.  However  it 
comes  one  needs  to  keep  to  the  sane  interpretation 
of  his  strength.  The  theatre  that  first  finds  its 
place,  develops  and  magnifies  this  place,  keeping 


ART  AND  OUTLOOK  217 

close  hold  always  on  its  funded  assets,  yet  reach- 
ing out  always  for  the  new  is  going  to  be  of  some 
service  to  the  state. 

One  good  result  of  the  work  of  the  insurgent 
theatres  has  been  the  extent  to  which  their  prin- 
ciples have  been  accepted  on  the  commercial  stage. 
We  have  seen  many  cases  in  which  the  insurgent 
theatres  have  been  stepping  stones  to  the  best 
places  in  Broadway.  C.  D.  Coburn  came  from 
the  circuits  which  he  had  built  and  upon  which  he 
had  based  his  training  in  classic  repertory  directly 
onto  Broadway.  B.  Iden  Payne  was  the  director 
of  an  English  insurgent  company  until  he  became 
a  very  busy  producer  of  plays  in  New  York. 
Robert  E.  Jones  took  but  one  step  from  unpro- 
duced  experiment  outside  the  theatre  to  produced 
success  in  the  commercial  theatre.  The  Washing- 
ton Square  Players  and  the  Neighborhood  Play- 
house have  sent  productions  from  their  own  stages 
directly  to  the  houses  of  the  most  unbending  of 
commercial  managers.  I  mention  these  things 
not  as  success  but  as  evidences  of  success  that  had 
come  before.  In  going  into  the  professional  the- 
atre these  people  were  taking  along  their  ideas. 
Gone  is  the  old  fleer,  the  insurgent  is  the  outsider. 
Today  he  is  not  discontent  because  he  is  an  out- 


218      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

sider;  he  is  an  outsider  because  he  is  discontent. 
And  his  discontent  is  a  surer  means  of  bringing 
him  inside  than  another  man's  conformity. 

Along  with  the  influence  from  those  who  bring 
insurgency  into  the  theatre  is  the  influence  from 
those  who  accept  it.  Mrs.  Fiske,  Arnold  Daly, 
Mary  Shaw  always  were  insurgents  within  the 
theatre.  They  came  at  a  time  when  the  dirty 
work  of  insurgency  had  not  been  done  by  others. 
But  Arthur  Hopkins,  Margaret  Anglin,  Faver- 
sham,  Benrimo  can  today  take  without  discomfort 
the  results  of  the  researches  of  other  men  outside 
the  pale,  and  their  prominent  position  on  the  stage 
shows  that  it  has  paid  to  do  so. 

Will  the  insurgent  theatres  become  profes- 
sional? Yes,  if  by  professional  you  mean  order 
and  craftsmanship.  No,  if  by  professional  you 
mean,  as  you  have  meant  in  the  past,  false  order 
and  artifice.  This  answer  must  be  made  to  all 
idealists  about  the  theatre.  The  theatre  is  a  busi- 
ness. There  is  no  plan  by  which  it  could  be  run 
other  than  as  a  business.  The  great  men  of  the 
theatre  have  always  been  good  business  men.  It 
is  a  business  because  it  involves  business  features 
in  the  organization  of  workers  and  in  the  selling 
of  wares.  There  is  no  way  of  getting  harmony  in 
a  company  and  in  a  group  of  workers  other  than 


ART  AND  OUTLOOK  219 

by  an  efficient  and  common  sense  basis  of  manage- 
ment. Good- will  counts  for  much,  personality, 
fire,  zeal,  count  for  much,  but  justice  to  all,  a  sys- 
tem based  on  reason  and  economy  and  a  due  regard 
for  the  best  interests  of  all  are  essential.  The 
best  feature  of  the  Washington  Square  Players  is 
the  fact  that  they  have  been  able  to  adapt  their 
idealistic  principles  to  a  really  efficient  business 
organization. 

No  theatre  can  exist  without  its  audience.  And 
an  audience  cannot  attach  itself  to  a  whimsical  in- 
stitution. The  audience  has  to  know  that  the  in- 
stitution is  there  rain  or  shine.  It  does  not  wish 
to  be  made  aware  of  the  machinery,  but  one  thing 
it  demands,  absolute  dependability  in  the  ma- 
chinery created  for  its  service.  This  is  no  less 
true  in  the  institution  of  entertainment  than  in 
transportation,  no  less  true  at  a  little  theatre  than 
at  a  circus. 

The  result  is  that  every  company  that  would 
live  must  adapt  itself  to  the  regulations  of  for- 
mality and  organization.  There  comes  the  point 
when  this  is  in  fact  professionalism.  And  just  as 
inevitably  there  comes  the  time  when  expert  act- 
ing, sane  principles  of  staging,  workmanlike  plays 
follow  as  by  the  operation  of  natural  law.  All 
these  things  are  in  fact  coming  as  the  new  theatres 


220     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

find  their  codes  and  are  able  to  adapt  themselves 
to  them. 

As  to  the  standards  of  acting  and  plays  I  grant 
that  the  playing  at  many  little  theatres  has  been 
faulty  and  that  the  plays  have  been  half-done. 
I  do  not  know  how  soon  some  turn  of  fate  is 
going  to  change  the  face  of  the  theatrical  situa- 
tion in  America.  But  I  am  sure  that  none  of  the 
work  that  has  been  done  has  been  lost,  and  that 
the  faulty  work  has  been  hardly  less  valuable  than 
the  good  work  for  the  purpose  in  hand.  The 
work  remains  in  two  ways,  in  records  of  deeds 
done,  plays  written  and  performed,  in  actors  and 
producers  instructed,  in  audiences  stimulated,  in 
books  and  plays  printed;  and  it  remains  also  in  the 
contributions  these  movements  have  made  to  the 
sum  total  of  thinking,  and  to  the  clearing  of  the 
channels  of  thought  and  communication  between 
men.  The  movements  remain  in  the  more  re- 
spectful attitude  maintained  toward  the  theatre 
by  critics  and  workers  in  the  busy  world. 

These  things  would  not  have  started  to  be 
stopped  half-way.  The  war  is  causing  some  un- 
quiet hours  here  as  in  other  affairs.  The  neces- 
sary back-fire  of  every  movement  has  already  be- 
gun to  try  men's  faith  in  their  works.  But  the 
lessons  that  have  been  learned  will  not  be  forgot- 


ART  AND  OUTLOOK  221 

ten.  The  theatre  does  belong  to  the  people,  in  no 
demagogic  sense,  but  honestly  and  sincerely.  It 
is  not  a  mystery  or  a  thing  of  illusion  and  lies,  or 
a  drab  or  a  procurer,  or  a  mine  to  be  milked  of 
gold.  It  is  a  source  of  the  great  adventure  of 
democracy  by  which  artists  who  work  in  human 
nature  study  to  body  forth  their  vision  of  truth. 

Some  things  have  been  discovered  without  per- 
adventure  of  a  doubt.  Money  is  not  a  stimulus 
to  work  or  to  imagination  in  the  theatre.  Writ- 
ers will  compose  and  players  will  act  for  no  money 
or  little  just  so  long  as  you  let  them  build  them- 
selves into  what  they  do.  They  will  do  it  in  the 
early  days  for  fun  or  in  devotion  to  a  cause,  and 
then — and  this  is  important — as  you  support  them 
in  their  work  with  your  intelligence  and  your  taste, 
they  will  do  it  regularly  for  an  institution  in 
which  they  believe  and  whose  servants  they  will 
be.  Money  is  not  the  specific.  And  as  we  dis- 
cover this  we  find  some  codes  upon  which  the 
theatre  of  the  future  may  be  built.  Endow  them, 
yes,  but  not  with  money  until  after  you  have  en- 
dowed them  with  brains;  not  with  resources  until 
you  have  made  them  free  to  use  those  resources; 
not  with  a  building  until  you  have  provided  them 
an  audience. 

The  artist  is  self-respecting,  proud  in  the  best 


222     THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

sense.  In  so  far  as  he  touches  society  at  all  he 
prefers  to  feel  that  he  meets  it  in  fair  exchange. 
He  wants  nothing  for  nothing.  The  artist  does 
not  live  who  can  do  his  best  work  under  benefac- 
tion. Therein  lies  the  fault  of  the  subsidy  sys- 
tem. It  binds  the  artist  at  the  very  point  at 
which  he  can  least  afford  to  be  bound,  in  his  rever- 
ence for  himself.  So  the  best  theatre  is  that 
which  most  cuts  its  cloth  to  the  true  pattern  of 
public  support,  not  giving  more  than  is  paid  for 
and  not,  as  is  so  generally  the  case,  less,  but  using 
the  favor  of  men's  understanding  and  support  as 
a  premise  by  which  to  push  forward  to  new  con- 
clusions. The  beauty  of  this  is  that  it  keeps  the 
mind  alert.  It  keeps  one  aware.  And  that  is 
the  secret  of  the  art  of  the  theatre. 

The  history  of  these  days  has  been  one  of  en- 
thusiastic effort,  the  chief  call  being  to  do  some- 
thing or  we  die.  It  is  true  enough  that  very  few 
knew  what  to  do,  or  how  to  distinguish  the  true 
thing  from  the  false.  For  this  reason  the  early  ef- 
forts offer  a  face  of  doubt,  of  mixed  motives,  or  a 
strain  of  idealism  mixed  with  a  strange  over- 
reaching of  self-interest,  of  careful  programmes 
broken  by  tangled  councils  not  only  in  committees 
but  in  the  minds  of  directors.  The  trouble  is  no 
one  knew  exactly  for  what  he  was  seeking.  En- 


ART  AND  OUTLOOK  223 

thusiasms  were  plentiful  but  clear  programmes 
were  few. 

The  favorable  side  of  this  situation,  which  in 
some  respects  seemed  to  mean  the  setting  of  no 
standards  at  all  in  the  place  of  standards  frankly 
debased,  was  that  through  it  all  the  young  work- 
ers were  learning  where  they  were  wrong,  where 
they  might  be  right  next  time,  and  that  surely  and 
not  too  slowly  they  were  discovering  a  method  to 
which  some  absolute  principles  of  judgment  might 
be  applied.  They  were  showing  us  in  their  own 
experience  what  Duse  meant  when  she  said,  "To 
save  the  theatre  the  theatre  must  be  destroyed." 

In  referring  to  the  artists  from  whom  the  real 
impulse  came  the  best  credit  must  be  given  to  the 
artists  of  design  who  a  few  years  ago  discovered 
the  theatre.  Of  all  artists  they  best  had  the  fresh 
joy  in  work,  the  plunge  of  creativeness,  the  fra- 
ternal spirit  that  were  needed  in  the  theatre. 
When  they  discovered  that  their  masses  and 
drapes  and  colors  were  indeed  dramatic,  that  they 
had  in  them  the  mysteries  of  motion  and  of  time 
and  of  passion  they  turned  to  with  a  ready  will. 
They  brought  to  the  theatre  adventure,  experi- 
ment and  a  fresh  vision.  They  brought  the  play- 
ful spirit  of  the  ateliers.  Naturally  in  their  first 
enthusiasm  they  tended  to  depress  the  scale  to 


224      THE  INSURGENT  THEATRE 

their  side.  For  awhile  it  has  seemed  that  the  pic- 
ture was  to  be  all  of  the  play,  the  set  more  im- 
portant than  the  story.  But  this  is  only  tem- 
porary. As  time  goes  on  the  pictorial  artists  will 
take  their  place  in  the  full  circle  of  the  workers  of 
the  theatre  without  jealousy  and  without  self- 
aggrandizement. 

As  for  plays  and  players,  the  demand  for  an 
American  art  of  the  stage  and  an  American  drama, 
I  am  going  to  let  others  treat  these  questions  when 
the  record  is  a  little  further  advanced.  For  my 
part  I  do  not  think  we  should  talk  very  much 
about  such  things.  The  watched  pot  of  a  na- 
tional literature  doesn't  boil.  I  think  the  little 
insurgent  theatres  have  nothing  to  apologize  for 
in  these  respects.  They  have  had  to  create  new 
material  and  they  have  had  to  infuse  a  new  spirit ; 
they  could  neither  take  the  materials  of  the  com- 
mercial stage  nor  could  they  find  the  material 
ready  at  hand  apart  from  the  stage.  They  had 
to  make  it.  At  the  start  there  was  little  to  recom- 
mend their  work  but  the  spirit.  But  after  all 
that  was  the  one  thing  needful.  As  time  has  gone 
on  there  has  been  added  to  the  impulse  to  truth 
a  certain  firmness  of  hand  and  steadiness  of  vision. 

All  in  all  the  theatre  seems  to  me  to  be  today  in 


ART  AND  OUTLOOK  225 

the  not  unencouraging  position  of  a  young  runner 
who  for  some  time  has  been  cantering  about  warm- 
ing up  and  now  bends  over  the  tape  ready  and 
eager  for  a  race  against  strong  odds. 


APPENDIX 
PLAY  LISTS  OF  THEATRES 

THE  NEW  THEATRE.     Chicago.     1906-7.     Victor  Ma- 

pes,  Director. 

Repertory:  La  Belle  Sainara  (d'Hervilly)  ;  Engaged 
(Gilbert)  ;  Marse  Covington  (Ade)  ;  The  Great  Galeoto 
(Echegaray)  ;  The  Spoilers  (Beach)  ;  The  Goal  (Jones)  ; 
The  Son-in-Law  (Le  Gendre  de  M.  Poirier  by  Augier) ; 
Kerry  (Boucicault) ;  Elga  (Hauptmann)  ;  Sweet  Lav- 
ender (Pinero) ;  Dora  (Sardou) ;  The  Masquerade 
(Fulda) ;  Margaret  Fleming  (Herne) ;  The  Whole 
World  (S.  M.  Illsley). 

THE  ROBERTSON  PLAYERS.     Chicago.  1907-9.     Donald 

Robertson,  Director. 

Repertory:  The  Miser  (Moliere)  ;  The  Triumph  of 
Youth  (Pailleron) ;  Rosmersholm  (Ibsen) ;  The  Coming 
of  Peace  (Hauptmann) ;  A  Blot  in  the  'Scutcheon 
(Browning)  ;  The  Intruder  (Maeterlinck) ;  In  a  Balcony 
(Browning)  ;  The  Intruding  Widow  (Lamb)  ;  A  Night  in 
Avignon  (Cale  Young  Rice)  ;  The  Law  (Sturges)  ;  The 
Gauntlet  (Bjornson) ;  Keep  Your  Own  Secret  (Cald- 
eron)  ;  The  Inspector  (Gogol)  ;  Sigurd  Slembe  (Bjorn- 
son) ;  As  the  Leaves  (Giacosa) ;  A  Curious  Mishap 
(Goldoni) ;  Madman  or  Saint  (Echegaray) ;  Comus 
(Milton)  ;  The  Chaplet  of  Pan  (Stevens  and  Rice)  ; 
Rahab  (Burton)  ;  The  Prodigal  (Voltaire)  ;  Zaragueta 
(Asa  and  Carrion)  ;  John  Gabriel  Borkman  (Ibsen)  ; 

227 


228  APPENDIX 

Miller  of  Boskobel  (Garland) ;  The  Art  of  Life 
L.  W.  Smith) ;  Torquato  Tasso  (Goethe) ;  Tartuffe 
(Moliere)  ;  Happiness  in  a  Corner  (Sudermann)  ;  The 
Mayor  of  Zalamaya  (Calderon) ;  The  Critic  (Sheri- 
dan) ;  A  Marriage  (Bjornson) ;  The  Postscript  (Au- 
gier). 

THE  HULL  HOUSE  THEATRE.     Chicago.     Reorganized 

1907.  Laura  Dainty  Pelham,  Director. 
In  the  repertory  there  have  been  from  1907  to  date 
23  full  length  plays  and  24  one-act  plays.  Important 
plays  from  Repertory:  The  Sad  Shepherd  ( Jonson)  ; 
Pillars  of  Society  (Ibsen)  ;  The  Silver  Box,  Justice,  The 
Pigeon  (Galsworthy)  ;  You  Never  Can  Tell,  The  Devil's 
Disciple,  Arms  and  the  Man  (Shaw)  ;  The  Tragedy  of 
Nan  (Masefield) ;  Grania,  The  Workhouse  Ward, 
The  Rising  of  the  Moon,  Spreading  the  News,  Devor- 
gilla  (Gregory)  ;  Riders  to  the  Sea  (Synge)  ;  Rutherford 
and  Son  (Sowerby) ;  Punishment  (Bierstadt) ;  The 
Magnanimous  Lover,  Mixed  Marriage  (Ervine). 

THE  CASTLE  SQUARE  THEATRE.    Boston.     1908  to  date. 

John  Craig,  Director. 

A  specimen  of  Stock  Repertory,  Jan.  5,  1914,  to  May 
1O,  1915:  Mrs.  Wiggs  of  the  Cabbage  Patch,  The 
"Mind  the  Paint"  Girl,  Hamlet,  Hawthorne  of  U.  S.  A., 
All  the  Comforts  of  Home,  The  Great  Ruby,  Stop  Thief! 
Where's  Your  Wife*?  The  Girl  of  the  Golden  West, 
Mrs.  Gorringe's  Necklace,  The  Crisis,  Soldiers  of  For- 
tune, The  Charity  Ball,  RipxVan  Winkle,  A  Midsummer 
Night's  Dream,  Officer  666,  the  Deep  Purple,  The  Ghost 
Breaker,  The  Rejuvenation  of  Aunt  Mary,  The  Man  o' 
War's  Man,  The  End  of  the  Bridge,  Baby  Mine,  Over 
Night,  Broadway  Jones,  Kindling,  Arizona,  A  Widow  by 
Proxy,  Graustark,  The  Ne'er-do-Welt,  Madame  X? 


APPENDIX  229 

Ready  Money,  The  Thief,  Paid  in  Full,  Too  Much 
Johnson,  A  Midnight  Bell,  The  Bishop's  Carriage,  Se- 
cret Service,  Snow  White,  Kindling,  Common  Clay 
(Harvard  Prize  Play,  first  production). 

THE  TALMA  CLUB.     Providence.     1909  to  date.     H.  A. 

Barker,  Director. 

The  repertory  for  seven  seasons  covers  43  plays, 
including:  The  Liars  (Jones);  The  Marriage  of 
Wit  and  Science;  How  He  Lied  to  Her  Husband 
(Shaw);  The  Merchant  of  Venice;  The  Importance  of 
Being  Earnest  (Wilde)  ;  The  Tyranny  of  Tears  (Cham- 
bers) ;  Cousin  Kate  (Davies) ;  Her  Husband's  Wife, 
The  Rainbow  (A.  E.  Thomas)  ;  The  Chinese  Lantern 
(Housman) ;  Prunella  (Housman  and  Barker) ;  The 
Neighbors  (Gale)  ;  Mrs.  Dane's  Defense  (Jones)  ;  The 
Witching  Hour  (Thomas) ;  The  Far  Away  Princess 
(Sudermann). 

THE  NEW  THEATRE.    New  York.     1909-1911.    Win- 

throp  Ames,  Director. 

Repertory:  Antony  and  Cleopatra;  The  Cottage  in 
the  Air  (Knoblauch)  ;  Strife  (Galsworthy)  ;  The  Nigger 
(Sheldon) ;  The  School  for  Scandal  (Sheridan)  ;  Don 
(Besier) ;  Liz  the  Mother;  Brand,  one  act  (Ibsen); 
Twelfth  Night;  The  Witch  (H.  Wiers-Jenss'en,  adapted 
by  H.  Hagedorn) ;  A  Song  of  the  People  (Sophus 
Michaelis,  borrowed  production) ;  Sister  Beatrice 
(Maeterlinck) ;  Beethoven  (Rene  Fauchois) ;  A  Win- 
ter's Tale;  The  Blue  Bird  (Maeterlinck);  The  Merry 
Wives  of  Windsor;  The  Thunderbolt  (Pinero)  ;  Mary 
Magdalene  (Maeterlinck)  ;  Vanity  Fair  (dramatized  by 
R.  Hichens  and  C.  Gordon-Lennox) ;  The  Piper 
(Marks) ;  Nobody's  Daughter  (G.  Paston) ;  The  Arrow 
Maker  (Austin). 


230  APPENDIX 

THE    COBURN    PLAYERS.    New    York.    1908    to    date. 

C.  D.  Coburn,  Director. 

Repertory:  Macbeth,  Hamlet,  Romeo  and  Juliet, 
Othello,  Julius  Caesar,  As  You  Like  It,  Twelfth  Night, 
Merchant  of  Venice,  A  Comedy  of  Errors,  Merry  Wives 
of  Windsor,  A  Midsummer  Night's  Dream,  The  Taming 
of  the  Shrew,  Much  Ado  About  Nothing,  The  Tempest, 
Henry  V,  Richard  III  (Shakespeare)  ;  Electra,  Iphigenia 
in  Tauris  (Euripides,  translated  by  Gilbert  Murray)  ; 
The  Imaginary  Invalid  (Moliere) ;  The  Canterbury 
Pilgrims,  Jeanne  d'Arc,  The  Bird  Masque,  Chuck,  The 
Antick,  Sam  Average  (MacKaye). 

THE    DRAMA    PLAYERS.     Chicago.     1911-12.    Donald 

Robertson,  Director. 

Repertory:  The  Lady  from  the  Sea  (Ibsen);  The 
Learned  Ladies  (Moliere)  ;  The  Thunderbolt  (Pinero) ; 
The  Maternal  Instinct  (Herrick)  ;  The  Passing  of  the 
Torch  (Hervieu) ;  Gold  (Ancilla  Hunter) ;  The 
Stronger  (Giacosa)  ;  The  Coffee  House  (Goldoni)  ;  June 
Madness  (Henry  Kitchell  Webster). 

WISCONSIN  DRAMATIC  SOCIETY. 

Madison  Branch.  1911-1915.  Thomas  H.  Dickin- 
son, Director.  Repertory:  The  Intruder  (Maeter- 
linck) ;  The  Master  Builder  (Ibsen) ;  The  Hour  Glass 
(Yeats)  ;  Glory  of  the  Morning  (Leonard)  ;  The  Post- 
script (Augier)  ;  The  Neighbors  (Gale)  ;  Dust  of  the 
Road  (Goodman  and  Stevens) ;  Ryland  (Stevens  and 
Goodman) ;  In  Hospital  (Dickinson) ;  The  Mistress  of 
the  Inn  (Goldoni)  ;  The  Book  of  Job  (Adapt,  by  H.  M. 
Kallen)  ;  The  Two  Mr.  Wetherbys  (Hankin). 

Milwaukee  Branch.  1911-1915.  Laura  Sherry,  Di- 
rector. Repertory:  Riders  to  the  Sea  (Synge) ;  The 


APPENDIX  231 

Stronger  (Strindberg) ;  The  Revolt  (Adam) ;  How  He 
Lied  to  Her  Husband  (Shaw)  ;  Prunella  (Housman  and 
Barker) ;  The  Marriage  of  Sobeide  (Hofmannsthal, 
trans,  by  B.  Q.  Morgan) ;  The  Feast  of  the  Holy  Inno- 
cents (Illsley) ;  Tradition  (Middleton) ;  Just  Livin' 
(Sherry). 

THE  TOY  THEATRE.     Boston.     1912-1915.     Mrs.  Ly- 

man  W.  Gale,  Director. 

Repertory:  Two  Out  of  Time  (O.  Herford)  ;  In  His 
House  (Middleton) ;  Press  Cuttings  (Shaw) ;  The 
Wings  (Marks) ;  Between  Engagements  (Hedberg) ; 
Sire  de  Maletroit's  Door  (from  Stevenson)  ;  The  Cuckoo 
(Jeannette  Marks) ;  Caprice  (Musset) ;  Fo'  Marse 
George  (Sayward) ;  Fealty  (Starr) ;  Miss  Civilization 
(Davis)  ;  The  Locked  Door,  pantomime  (Briggs)  ;  Son 
Average  1'Ecron  Brise  (Bordeaux)  ;  The  Right  to  Hap- 
piness (Sudermann)  ;  Fritzchen  (Sudermann)  ;  How  He 
Lied  to  Her  Husband  (Shaw)  ;  The  Confession  (Shea)  ; 
The  Silent  System  (Drey fuss) ;  The  Child  in  the  House 
(Howard) ;  The  Literary  Sense  (Schnitzler) ;  Uncle 
William's  Lobster  (Jeannette  Lee) ;  Hilarion  ( J.  Noel 
Carter) ;  The  Dark  Lady  of  the  Sonnets  (Shaw) ; 
*  Anatol  (Schnitzler)  ;  *  Creditors  (Strindberg)  ;  *  Joint 
Owners  in  Spain  (Alice  Brown)  ;  *  The  Trojan  Women 
(Euripides)  ;  *  By-Products  (Patterson)  ;  *  Catherine 
Parr  (Baring)  ;  *  Tradition  (Middleton)  ;  War  (Fil- 
more)  ;  Magic  (Chesterton)  ;  Across  the  Border  (Dix)  ; 
The  Two  Mr.  Wetherbys  (Hankin) ;  *  The  Great 
Catherine,-  *  The  Dark  Lady  of  the  Sonnets,  *  Over- 
ruled, *  Captain  Brassbound's  Conversion  (Shaw) ; 
Change  (Francis)  ;  *  A  Place  in  the  Sun  (Harcourt). 

*  Borrowed  production. 


232  APPENDIX 

THE    LITTLE    THEATRE.     New    York.     1912    to    date. 

Winthrop  Ames,  Director. 

Repertory:  The  Pigeon  (Galsworthy);  The  Flower 
of  the  Palace  of  Han  (from  Tcheu-Yuen  by  Charles 
Rann  Kennedy) ;  The  Terrible  Meek  (Kennedy) ;  The 
Affairs  of  Anatol  (Schnitzler) ;  Snow  White  and  the 
Seven  Dwarfs  (from  Grimms  by  Jesse  B.  White) ;  Ruth- 
erford and  Son  (Sowerby) ;  Prunella  (Housman  and  Bar- 
ker) ;  The  Philanderer  (Shaw) ;  The  Truth  (Fitch)  ;  A 
Pair  of  Silk  Stockings  (Harcourt) ;  Hush  (Violet 
Pearn) ;  Pierrot  the  Prodigal  (Wormser  and  Carre) ; 
The  Morris  Dance  (Barker). 

THE  PLAYS  AND  PLAYERS'  CLUB.     Philadelphia.     1912 

to  date. 

Repertory  of  two  seasons,  1915-1917:  Miss  Tassey 
(Elizabeth  Baker)  ;  The  Tents  of  the  Arabs  (Dunsany)  ; 
Rosalind  (Barrie)  ;  The  Son  and  Heir  (Gladys  Unger) ; 
The  Green  Coat  (Musset  and  Augier) ;  'Op-o'-Me- 
Thumb  (Fenn  and  Pryce)  ;  The  Land  of  Heart's  Desire 
(Yeats) ;  Dolly  Reforming  Herself  (Jones)  ;  The  Brav- 
est Thing  in  the  World  (Lee  Pape)  ;  The  Maker  of 
Dreams  (Down)  ;  The  House  Next  Door  (Manners)  ; 
The  Swan  Song  (Tchekhov)  ;  The  Post  Office  (Tagore)  ; 
Perspectives  (Mary  M.  Mitchell)  ;  The  Sea  Shell  (Fuller- 
ton  L.  Waldo)  ;  The  Kiss  (G.  Paxton) ;  Modesty  (Her- 
vieu)  ;  Masks  (Blanche  Dillaye) ;  Lithuania  (Brooke) ; 
Suppressed  Desires  (Glaspell) ;  Babbette  (E.  H.  Stir- 
ling) ;  The  Contrast  (Royall  Tyler) ;  King  Arthur's 
Socks  (Floyd  Dell)  ;  The  Game  (Louise  Bryant) ;  The 
Twelve  Pound  Look  (Barrie) ;  Trifles  (Glaspell)  ;  An- 
other Way  Out  (Langner) ;  Happiness  (Hartley  Man- 
ners) ;  Gentlemen  Unafraid  (Vinton  Freedley) ;  The 
Bracelet  (Sutro)  ;  Rosalind  (Barrie) ;  Falstaff  on  Broad- 
way (Wharton  Stork)  ;  and  eight  prize  plays. 


APPENDIX  233 

THE  NORTHAMPTON  THEATRE.  Northampton,  Mass. 
191^  Jessie  Bonstelle  and  Bertram  Harrison,  Di- 
rectors^. v 

A  season  of  their  Repertory,  1916-1917 :  Daddy  Long 
Legs,  It  Pays  to  Advertise,  Copamon  Clay,  Rolling 
Stones,  Under  Fire,  Jerry,  Hawthorne  of  U.  S.  A.,  The 
Blindness  of  Virtue,  A  FuJ>House,  The  Old  Homestead, 
The  Morals  of  Marcus,  Don,  Beverly's  Balance,  The 
Squaw  Man,  Rosexfr1  the  Rancho,  Polly  of  the  Circus, 
Sherlock  HolmdC  My  Lady's  Dress,  David  Harum, 
Captain  Jip&s,  Nobody's  Widow,  Mile-a-Minute  Ken- 
dall, A^Message  from  Mars,  School  for  Scandal,  Arms 
and  >rfie  Girl,  Shore  Acres,  His  Majesty  Bunker  Bean, 
festones. 

THE     LITTLE     THEATRE.     Chicago.     1912     to     date. 

Maurice  Browne,  Director. 

Repertory:  The  Trojan  Women,  Medea  (Euripi- 
des) ;  Hedda  Gabler,  Rosmersholm  (Ibsen)  ;  Creditors, 
The  Stronger  (Strindberg)  ;  Anatol  (Schnitzler)  ;  The 
Happy  Prince  (Wilde,  dramatized  by  Lou  Wall  Moore 
and  Margaret  T.  Allen)  ;  The  Philanderer,  Mrs.  War- 
ren's Profession  (Shaw) ;  Deirdre  of  the  Sorrows 
(Synge)  ;  Delphine  Declines  (Leonard  Merrick,  drama- 
tized by  Oren  Taft)  ;  The  Pixy,  The  Mothers,  The  Sub- 
jection of  Kezia  (Mrs.  Havelock  Ellis) ;  The  Shadowy 
Waters,  On  Baile's  Strand  (Yeats) ;  Womenkind  (Gib- 
son) ;  Joint  Owners  in  Spain  (Alice  Brown) ;  Catherine 
Parr  (Baring)  ;  The  Maker  of  Dreams  (Down)  ;  Mr. 
and  Mrs.  P.  Roe  (Martyn  Johnson) ;  The  Fifth  Com- 
mandment (Houghton) ;  The  Constant  Lover,  The 
Charity  that  Began  at  Home  (Hankin)  ;  The  Lost  Silk 
Hat  (Dunsany)  ;  Jael  (Florence  Kiper  Frank)  ;  Colum- 
bine (Arkell) ;  The  King  of  the  Jews  (Browne)  ;  Lit!:- 


234  APPENDIX 

uania  (Brooke)  ;  the  Pretty  Sabine  Women  (Andreyev)  ; 
The  Grotesques  (Head)  ;  The  Letter,  Extreme  Unction, 
The  Bachelor,  The  Grasshopper,  Temperament  (Mary 
Aldis)  ;  Mary  Broome  (Monkhouse)  ;  The  Hindu  Gods 
—  Shadow  Magic  (Arthur  and  Beryl  Hight)  ;  Cranford 
(Mrs.  Gaskell,  dramatized  by  Marguerite  Merington). 

THE   LITTLE  THEATRE.     Philadelphia.     1913   to   date. 
0     L  IK.    Mrs.  H*1'*1'**  JaY»  Director. 

l*^"  Selection     from     Repertory:     The     Adventures     of 

Chlora  (anon.)  ;  Ghosts  (Ibsen)  ;  The  Court  Tenor 
(Wedekind)  ;  Pater  Noster  (Coppee)  ;  French  as  She  is 
Spoke  (T.  Bernard)  ;  The  Importance  of  being  Earnest 
(Wilde)  ;  Sister  Beatrice  (Maeterlinck)  ;  Tomorrow 
(MacKaye)  ;  The  Pigeon  (Galsworthy)  ;  His  Majesty 
the  Fool  (Andrews)  ;  Tiger  (Bynner)  ;  The  Man  in  the 
Street  (Parker)  ;  Literature  (Schnitzler)  ;  Pierrot  of  the 
Minute  (Dowson)  ;  Arms  and  the  Man  (Shaw)  ;  The 
Rivals  (Sheridan)  ;  The  Constant  Lover  (Hankin)  ; 
Hindle  Wakes  (Houghton)  ;  The  Silver  Box  (Gals- 
worthy)  ;  The  Critic  (Sheridan)  ;  Lonesome  Like  (Brig- 
house)  ;  The  Admirable  Bashville,  The  Dark  Lady  of 
the  Sonnets  (Shaw)  ;  The  Piper  (Marks)  ;  The  Servant 
in  the  House  (Kennedy)  ^Cranquebille  (France)  ;  Bar- 
bara  (Goodman)  ;  The  Glittering  Gate  (Dunsany)  ; 
/Miles  Dixon  (Cannan)  ;  The  Birthday  (Fulda)  ;  The 
Miracle  of  St.  Anthony  (Maeterlinck)  ;  The  Carrier 
Pigeon  (Phillpotts)  ;  The  Bear  (Tchekhov)  ;  Simoom 
(Strindberg)  ;  In  April  (Rose  Pastor  Stokes)  ;  The  Blind 
(Maeterlinck)  ;  The  Lingerie  Laureate  (Lee  Pape)  ;  The 
Emperor  (Richardson)  ;  The  Manoeuvres  of  Jane 
(Jones)  ;  Misalliance  (Shaw)  ;  What  the  Doctor  Ordered 
(Thomas);  The  Weakest  Link  (Dix)  ;  At  Night  all 
Cats  are  Grey  (Robert  Garland)  ;  You  Never  Can  Tell 
(Shaw)  ;  The  Subjection  of  Kezia  (Mrs.  Havelock  El- 


APPENDIX  235 

lis) ;  The  Doctor's  Dilemma,  Candida  (Shaw)  ;  A  Doll's 
House  (Ibsen). 

THE  47   WORKSHOP  OF   HARVARD.    Boston.     1913   to 

date.     G.  P.  Baker,  Director. 

Repertory  of  original  plays:  Lina  Amuses  Herself 
(W.  Fenimore  Merrill)  ;  Educated  (Marian  F.  Winnek)  ; 
Millo  Make-Believe  (Eleanor  Hallowell  Abbott  Co- 
burn)  ;  The  Call  of  the  Mountain  (Edwin  Carty 
Ranck) ;  Home  Sweet  Home  (Violet  Robinson) ;  Ro- 
mance of  the  Rose,  pantomime  (Sam  Hume) ;  Why  the 
Chimes  Rang  (Elizabeth  MacFadden)  ;  His  Womenfolk 
(Abby  Merchant)  ;  The  Only  Girl  in  Sight  (Caroline 
H.  Budd)  ;  In  For  Himself  (Mark  W.  Reed) ;  Nothing 
But  Money  (Margaret  Champney) ;  Court  Favor  (from 
Oscar  Wilde  by  Astrid  Kimball) ;  The  Waves  of  Torre 
(Ethel  Claire  Randall) ;  Between  the  Lines  (Charlotte 
B.  Chorpenning) ;  The  Purple  Dream  (Donald  L. 
Breed)  ;  The  Rebound  (Thomas  P.  Robinson)  ;  Plots  and 
Playwrights  (Edward  Massey) ;  The  Return  of  the 
Prodigal  (Lewis  Beach)  ;  The  Other  Voice  (Sydney  Fair- 
banks) ;  Prudence  in  Particular  (Rachel  Barton  But- 
ler) ;  The  Wonder  Worker  (Lucy  Wright)  ;  The  Rescue 
(Rita  C.  Smith);  The  Florist  Shop  (Winifred  Hawk- 
ridge)  ;  The  Glory  of  Their  Years  ( J.  R.  Froome)  ; 
Will  O'  The  Wisp  (Doris  F.  Halman)  ;  The  Colonel's 
Comuppence  (Catherine  Clugston)  ;  Eyvind  of  the  Hills 
(Johann  Sigurjonnson)  ;  Rusted  Stock  (Doris  Halman). 

THE  LITTLE  COUNTRY  THEATRE.     Fargo,  N.  Dakota. 

1914  to  date.     A.  G.  Arvold,  Director. 
The  repertory  covers  about  eighty  plays  of  all  schools 
of  which  the  following  are  representative:     A  Bee  in  a 
Drone's  Hive  (original  play  by  Cecil  Baker) ;  Miss  Civ- 
ilization   (Davis) ;   Cured    (H.   C.   Bunner) ;    Engaged 


236  APPENDIX 

(Gilbert)  ;  Every  Ship  Will  Find  a  Harbor  (original 
play  by  Albert  C.  Heine)  ;  For  the  Cause  (original  play 
by  Charles  G.  Carlson)  ;  Farm  Home  Scene  in  Iceland 
Thirty  Years  Ago  (original,  by  M.  Thorfmnson)  ;  Her 
Husband's  Wife  (A.  E.  Thomas);  'Op-o'-Me-Thumb 
(Fenn  and  Pryce)  ;  The  Prairie  Wolf  (original  play  by 
John  Lange)  ;  The  Raindrops  (original  play  by  E.  V. 
Briem  and  Matthias  Thorfmnson)  ;  Ruth  (original  play 
by  Abbie  L.  Simmons)  ;  The  Rejuvenation  of  Aunt  Mary 
(Warner)  ;  The  Servant  in  the  House  (Kennedy)  ;  Sam 
Average  (MacKaye)  ;  The  Rising  of  the  Moon,  The 
Travelling  Man  (Lady  Gregory) ;  The  Swan  Song 
(Tchekhov). 

CARNEGIE  INSTITUTE  OF  TECHNOLOGY,  DRAMATIC  ARTS 
DEPARTMENT.  Pittsburgh,  Penn.  1914  to  date. 
Thomas  Wood  Stevens,  Director. 
Repertory:  The  Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona,  Much 
Ado  About  Nothing,  As  You  Like  It,  A  Winter's  Tale, 
Richard  II  (Shakespeare)  ;  Iphigenia  in  Tauris,  Hippo- 
lytus  (Euripides) ;  Poetaster  (Jonson) ;  The  Elder 
Brother  (Fletcher)  ;  Tartuffe  (Moliere)  ;  Pillars  of  Soci- 
ety (Ibsen)  ;  The  Liars  (Jones)  ;  You  Never  Can  Tell 
(Shaw)  ;  The  Importance  of  Being  Earnest  (Wilde)  ; 
Life's  a  Dream  (Calderon)  ;  Henri  Durot  (Goodman  and 
Hecht)  ;  The  Weevils  (original  play  by  Smith  and  Ben- 
nett) ;  The  King's  Threshold,  The  Land  of  Heart's  De- 
sire (Yeats)  ;  The  Chaplet  of  Pan  (Stevens  and  Rice)  ; 
The  Second  Shepherd's  Play;  Le  medecin  malgre  lui 
(Moliere)  ;  The  Shadow  of  the  Glen  (Synge)  ;  The  Be- 
trayal (Colum) ;  Dancing  Dolls  (Goodman) ;  The 
Neighbors  (Gale)  ;  The  Wonder  Hat  (Goodman)  ;  The 
Tents  of  the  Arabs  (Dunsany)  ;  Glory  of  the  Morning 
(Leonard)  ;  The  Dead  are  Dead  (Brighouse)  ;  Holbein 
in  Blackfriars  (Stevens  and  Goodman) ;  Simoom 


APPENDIX  237 

(Strindberg) ;  Paolo  and  Francesca  (Phillips)  ;  Macaire 
(Stevenson  and  Henley)  ;  Deirdre  (Yeats)  ;  The  Newly 
Married  Couple  (Bjornson)  ;  Atalanta  in  Calydon  (Swin- 
burne). 

THE  KANSAS  CITY  COMEDY  CLUB.     Kansas  City.     1914 

to  date.     Marcus  Ford,  Director. 

The  repertory  covers  18  plays,  including:  Lady 
Patricia  (Besier) ;  The  Dear  Departed  (Houghton) ; 
Overtones  (Gerstenberg)  ;  The  Game  of  Chess  (Good- 
man) ;  The  Pigeon  (Galsworthy) ;  The  Gods  of  the 
Mountain  (Dunsany)  ;  Sacred  Ground  (Giacosa)  ;  The 
Bear  (Tchekhov)  ;  Hedda  Gabler  (Ibsen). 

THE  LITTLE  THEATRE.     Duluth.     1914  to  date. 

Repertory:  The  Dark  Lady  of  the  Sonnets  (Shaw)  ; 
The  Twelve  Pound  Look  (Barrie) ;  The  Workhouse 
Ward  (Gregory)  ;  The  Dear  Departed  (Houghton); 
How  He  Lied  to  Her  Husband  (Shaw);  The  Will 
(Barrie)  ;  The  Maker  of  Dreams  (Down)  ;  The  Lost 
Silk  Hat,  The  Glittering  Gate  (Dunsany)  ;  The  Carrier 
Pigeon  (Phillpotts) ;  The  Monkey's  Paw  (W.  W. 
Jacobs) ;  Milestones  (Bennett,  and  Knoblauch)  and 
eighteen  other  plays,  several  original. 

THE  LITTLE  THEATRE  SOCIETY  OF  INDIANA.     Indianap- 
olis.    1915  to  date. 

Repertory:  Polyxena  (adapted  from  Hecuba  of 
Euripides  by  S.  A.  Eliot,  Jr.)  ;  A  Killing  Triangle,  pan- 
tomime; The  Glittering  Gate  (Dunsany)  ;  The  Scheming 
Lieutenant  (Sheridan)  ;  A  Christmas  Miracle  Play  (from 
The  Pageant  of  the  Shearmen  and  Taylors  by  S.  A. 
Eliot,  Jr.);  Dad  (Maxwell  Parry);  The  Broken  God 
(Hortense  Flexner) ;  Overtones  (Gerstenberg) ;  The 
Pretty  Sabine  Women  (Andreyev)  ;  At  Steinbergs ;  The 


238  APPENDIX 

Game  of  Chess  (Kenneth  Sawyer  Goodman)  ;  How  He 
Lied  to  Her  Husband  (Shaw)  ;  The  Dark  Lady  of  The 
Sonnets  (Shaw)  ;  Dawn  (Percival  Wilde)  ;  The  Kisses 
of  Marjorie  (Booth  Tarkington)  ;  Chicane  (from  Jack 
London) ;  The  Groove  (Middleton) ;  Polly  of  Pogue's 
Run  (W.  O.  Bates) ;  Laughing  Gas  (Dreiser) ;  The 
Farce  of  Pierre  Patelin;  Duty  (Seumas  O'Brien);  The 
Lost  Silk  Hat  (Dunsany) ;  The  Maker  of  Dreams 
(Down)  ;  The  Importance  of  Being  Earnest  (Wilde)  ; 
Lithuania  (Brooke)  ;  Suppressed  Desires  (Glaspell) ; 
Spreading  the  News,  The  Rising  of  the  Moon  (Lady 
Gregory)  ;  Kathleen  ni  Houlihan  (Yeats). 

THE    WASHINGTON     SQUARE    PLAYERS.     New    York. 

1915  to  date.  Edward  Goodman,  Director. 
Repertory:  Interior  (Maeterlinck);  Eugenically 
Speaking  (Goodman)  ;  Licensed  (Basil  Lawrence)  ;  An- 
other Interior ;  Love  of  One's  Neighbor  (Andreyev) ; 
Moondown  (John  Reed) ;  My  Lady's  Honor  (Mur- 
dock  Pemberton)  ;  Two  Blind  Beggars  and  One  Less 
Blind  (Moeller) ;  The  Shepherd  in  the  Distance,  panto- 
mime in  Black  and  White  (Holland  Hudson) ;  The 
Miracle  of  St.  Anthony  (Maeterlinck)  ;  In  April  (Rose 
Pastor  Stokes) ;  Forbidden  Fruit  (Feuillet) ;  Saviours 
(Goodman)  ;  The  Bear  (Tchekhov) ;  Helena's  Husband 
(Moeller);  Fire  and  Water  (Hervey  White);  The 
Antick  (MacKaye)  ;  A  Night  of  Snows  (Bracco)  ;  Liter- 
ature (Schnitzler) ;  The  Honorable  Lover  (Bracco) ; 
Whims  (Musset)  ;  Overtones  (Gerstenberg) ;  The  Clod 
(Lewis  Beach)  ;  The  Road-house  in  Arden  (Moeller)  ; 
The  Tenor  (Wedekind) ;  The  Red  Cloak,  pantomime 
(Josephine  Meyer)  ;  Children  (Guy  Bolton  and  Tom 
Carlton)  ;  The  Age  of  Reason  (Cecil  Dorrian)  ;  The 
Magical  City  (Zoe  Akins) ;  Monsieur  Pierre  Patelin; 
Aglavaine  and  Selysette  (Maeterlinck)  ;  The  Sea  Gull 


APPENDIX  239 

(Tchekhov)  ;  A  Merry  Death  (Evreinov)  ;  Lover's  Luck 
(Porto-Riche)  ;  The  Sugar  House  (Alice  Brown)  ;  Sis- 
ters of  Susanna  (Moeller) ;  Bushido  (Takeda  Izumo, 
translated  by  von  Gersdorf  and  Hohl) ;  Trifles  (Glas- 
pell) ;  Another  Way  Out  (Langner) ;  Altruism  (Ett- 
linger)  ;  The  Death  of  Tintagiles  (Maeterlinck)  ;  The 
Last  Straw  (Crocker)  ;  The  Hero  of  Santa  Maria  (Good- 
man and  Hecht)  ;  Impudence  (Auernheimer)  ;  Plots  and 
Playwrights  (Edward  Massey) ;  *  The  Life  of  Man 
(Andreyev) ;  Sganarelle  (Moliere) ;  The  Poor  Fool 
(Bahr)  ;  *  Ghosts  (Ibsen)  ;  Pariah  (Strindberg). 

THE  NEIGHBORHOOD  PLAYHOUSE.  New  York.  Feb- 
ruary 1915  to  date.  Alice  and  Irene  Lewisohn, 
Directors. 

Repertory:  Jephthah's  Daughter;  Tethered  Sheep 
(Gilbert  Welsh)  ;  The  Glittering  Gate  (Dunsany)  ;  The 
Maker  of  Dreams  (Down)  ;  The  Waldies  (G.  S.  Ham- 
len) ;  Wild  Birds  (Violet  Pearn)  ;  Thanksgiving,  Fes- 
tival Dancers;  Petrouchka,  Festival  Dancers;  With  the 
Current  (Sholem  Asch) ;  The  Price  of  Coal  (Brig- 
house)  ;  The  Marriage  Proposal  (Tchekhov)  ;  A  Night 
at  an  Inn  (Dunsany) ;  The  Married  Woman  (Fernald)  ; 
Black  'Ell  (Miles  Malleson) ;  A  Sunny  Morning 
(Quintero)  ;  The  People  (Glaspell). 

Outside  attractions :  Ethel  Barrymore  in  The 
Shadow;  Ellen  Terry;  Robert  Whittier  in  Ghosts;  The 
Irish  Theatre  of  America;  Frank  Lea  Short;  Mrs. 
LeMoyne;  Gertrude  Kingston  in  Captain  Brassbound's 
Conversion;  The  Great  Catherine,  The  Inca  of  /eru- 
salem;  The  Queen's  Enemies;  David  Bispham  in 
Adelaide;  Mary  Lawton  and  Walter  Hampden  in  Mac- 
beth, abridged;  Die  Freie  Yiddische  Volksbiihne  in  The 

*  Full  length  play ;  others  are  in  one  or  two  acts. 


240  APPENDIX 

Fires  of  St.  John  (Sudermann) ;  Three  Generations 
(Ronetti  Romano) ;  Joel  (Perez  Hirschbein) ;  Sister  and 
Brother  (Mark  Arnstein) ;  For  Happiness,  The  Quest 
(Stanislaw  Pshitishewsky)  ;  An  Enemy  of  the  People 
(Ibsen)  ;  The  Last  One  (Hirschbein) ;  W.  W.  Gibson 
»•  and  Neighborhood  Players  in  Womenkind  and  Holiday. 
Children's  plays:  The  Shadow  of  Shut-eye  Town; 
Snow  White;  The  Gift  of  the  Fairies;  The  Goose  Girl 
(dramatic  version  of  Die  Konigskinder) ;  Hiawatha;  The 
Toy  Box  (Debussy). 

THE    BRAMHALL    PLAYHOUSE.     New ''York.     1915    to 

date.  Butler  Davenport,  Director. 
Repertory:  The  Lost  Co-reSpondent,  The  Depths  of 
Purity,  Keeping  Up  Appearances,  Tangled  Lives,  The 
Importance  of  Coming  and  Going,  Difference  in  Gods 
(Davenport);  The . Courtship  of  Then,  Now  and  To- 
morrow (Anna  Wynne).  S*~~ 

'  .      '  '     s,   ''  '  . 

THE    DETROIT    LITTLE    THEATRE.     Detroit.     1916    to 

date.     Sam  Hume,  Director. 

Repertory:  The  Tents  of  the  Arabs  (Dunsany); 
The  Bank  Account  (Howard  Brock) ;  The  Wonder  Hat 
(Goodman) ;  Sham  (Frank  G.  Tompkins) ;  Ephraim  and 
the  Winged  Bear  (Goodman)  ;  The  Revesby  Sword  Play; 
Abraham  and  Isaac;  The  Chinese  Lantern  (Housman) ; 
Helena's  Husband  (Moeller) ;  Trifles  (Glaspell)  ;  The 
Glittering  Gate,  The  Lost  Silk  Hat  (Dunsany)  ;  The 
Intruder  (Maeterlinck)  ;  Lonesome  Like  (Brighouse). 

THE  WISCONSIN  PLAYERS.     Milwaukee.     1916  to  date. 

Laura  Sherry,  Director. 

Repertory:  A  Blind  Wife,  The  Rich  Poor  Man 
(Walter  Morley)  ;  The  Man  Who  Married  the  Moon 
(Charlotte  Markham) ;  Bubbles  (Anna  Hempstead 


APPENDIX  241 

Branch) ;  A  Dead  Soul  (Austin  Simms)  ;  The  Feast  of 
the  Holy  Innocents  (Marshall  Illsley)  ;  Orange  Blossom 
(Phillips  Chynoweth)  ;  Ambition,  On  the  Pier  (Laura 
Sherry). 

THE  LITTLE  PLAYHOUSE  COMPANY.     St.  Louis.     1916  to 

date.     C.  J.  Masseck,  Director. 

Repertory:  Joy  (Galsworthy);  The  Florist's  Shop 
(Winifred  Hawkbridge) ;  Duty  (Seumas  O'Brien) ; 
Good  News  (Fred  Ballard)  ;  The  Playboy  of  the  West- 
ern World  (Synge) ;  The  Golden  Apple  (Gregory) ; 
Nero's  Mother  (Phillips) ;  An  Eye  for  an  Eye  (adapted 
from  Roumanian  by  Oscar  Leonard)  ;  Joint  Owners  in 
Spain  (Alice  Brown)  ;  Arduin  (Cale  Young  Rice)  ;  In 
a  Balcony  (Browning)  ;  Ghosts  (Ibsen) ;  Don  Pietro 
Caruso  (Bracco)  ;  Her  Children  (Robert  Hanna)  ;  The 
Stronger  (Strindberg)  ;  Riders  to  the  Sea  (Synge)  ;  Mar- 
got  (Sudermann)  ;  Reflections  (Margaret  Ewing). 

THE   VAGABOND   PLAYERS.     Baltimore.     1916   to   date. 

Adele  Gutman  Nathan,  Producing  Director. 
Repertory:  The  Artist  (Mencken) ;  Ryland  (Stevens 
and  Goodman)  ;  A  Merry  Death  (Evreinov)  ;  Bound 
East  for  Cardiff  (Eugene  O'Neill);  The  Stronger 
(Strindberg)  ;  The  Miracle  of  St.  Anthony  (Maeter- 
linck) ;  Contemporaries  (Wilbur  Daniel  Steele)  ;  The 
Betrayal  (Colum) ;  Suppressed  Desires  (Cook  and 
Glaspell) ;  The  Double  Miracle  (Robert  Garland) ;  The 
Maker  of  Dreams  (Down)  ;  The  Song  of  Songs ;  Over- 
ruled (Shaw)  ;  The  Theater  of  the  Soul  (Evreinov)  ; 
Helena's  Husband  (Moeller). 

THE  PROVINCETOWN  PLAYERS.    New  York.  1916  to 

date. 

Repertory:     Bound      East      for      Cardiff  (Eugene 

O'Neill)  ;  The  Game  (Louise  Bryant)  ;  King  Arthur's 


>d 


242  APPENDIX 

Socks  (Floyd  Dell)  ;  Freedom  (John  Reed) ;  Enemies 
(Neith  Boyce  and  Hutchins  Hapgood) ;  Suppressed  De- 
sires (Cook  and  Glaspell);  The  Two  Sons  (Boyce); 
Lima  Beans  (Alfred  Kreymborg) ;  Before  Breakfast 
(Eugene  O'Neill) ;  Barbarians  (Rita  Weilman) ;  The 
Dollar  (Pinski) ;  The  People  (Glaspell)  ;  Cocaine  (Pen- 
dleton  King). 


THE    PLAYERS'    WORKSHOP.     Chicago.     1916   to    date. 

Elizabeth  Bingham,  Director. 

Repertory:  Brown  (Maxwell  Bodenheim  and  Wil- 
liam Saphier)  ;  The  Home  Coming,  The  Wonder  Hat 
(Goodman  and  Hecht)  ;  Ten  Minutes  (Oren  Taft,  Jr.) ; 
Pierrot  in  the  Clear  of  the  Moon,  pantomime  (Gretchen 
Riggs) ;  An  Idyl  of  the  Shops  (Goodman  and  Hecht) ; 
A  Man  Can  Only  Do  His  Best,  The  Red  Flag  (Good- 
man) ;  The  Hero  of  Santa  Maria  (Goodman  and  Hecht)  ; 
Dregs  (Hecht) ;  Civilization  (E.  Cook) ;  Snow- White 
(M.  L.  Marsh)  ;  The  War  Game  (Alice  Gerstenberg  and 
Rienzi  de  Cordova) ;  The  Magnet  (Mary  Corse)  ;  The 
Man  (Oren  Taft,  Jr.)  ;  The  Pot-Boiler  (Gerstenberg) ; 
Poet's  Heart  (Bodenheim)  ;  The  Children  of  To-morrow 
(Maude  Moore-Clement)  ;  How  Very  Shocking  (Julian 
Thompson) ;  Mrs.  Margaret  Calhoun  (Hecht  and  Boden- 
heim) ;  Skeletons  out  of  the  Closet  (Elisha  Cook) ;  You 
Can't  Get  Away  From  It  (Frederick  Bruegger) ;  Rumor 
(Bruegger) ;  Out  of  the  Dark  (Donovan  Yeuell) ;  Ton- 
sils (Marie  L.  Marsh)  ;  No  Sabe  (E.  Cook) ;  Where  But 
in  America  (Arthur  Munro)  ;  Banbury  Cross  (Brueg- 
ger) ;  Beyond  (Gerstenberg). 

THE  PORTMANTEAU   THEATRE.    New   York.     1916  to 

date.     Stuart  Walker,  Director. 

Repertory:  The  Trimplet,  Six  Who  Pass  While  the 
Lentils  Boil,  The  Seven  Gifts,  pantomime,  The  Moon 


APPENDIX  243 

Lady,  pantomime,  Nevertheless,  The  Lady  of  the  Weep- 
ing Willow  Tree  (from  the  Japanese),  The  Medicine- 
Show,  The  Very  Naked  Boy,  The  Birthday  of  the  In- 
fanta, from  Oscar  Wilde  (Stuart  Walker)  ;  A  Fan  and 
Two  Candlesticks  (Mary  MacMillan)  ;  Gammer  Gur- 
ton's  Needle  (William  Stevenson) ;  Voices  (Hortense 
Flexner)  ;  The  Crier  by  Night  (Gordon  Bottomley)  ;  The 
Golden  Doom,  The  Gods  of  the  Mountain,  King  Argi- 
menes  and  the  Unknown  Warrior  (Dunsany). 

THE     BROOKLYN     REPERTORY     THEATRE.     Brooklyn. 

Feb.,  1917,  to  date, 

Repertory:  The  Mak«r  of  Dreams  (Down);  Poor 
Little  Girl  (Anna  Wahlenberg)  ;  The  Finger  of  God 
(P.  Wilde) ;  Zaragueta  (Asa  and  Carrion)  ;  A  Curious 
Mishap  (Goldoni)  ;  Household  Gods  (Violet  Robinson)  ; 
The  Subjection  of  Kezia  (Mrs.  Havelock  Ellis)  ;  The 
Rising  of  the  Moon  (Gregory)  ;  Candida  (Shaw). 


INDEX 


"Abraham  and  Isaac,"  103 

Academy  of  Music  (North- 
ampton), 41-42 

Adolph  Phillip  Theatre 
(N.  Y.),  174 

"Agamemnon,"   103 

Agassiz  Hall  (Radcliffe),  107 

"Aglavaine  and  Selysette," 
178 

American  City,  58 

American  Federation  of  Cath- 
olic Societies,  46-47 

American  People's  Theatre, 
213 

Ames,     Winthrop,     34,     121, 

I53-IS9,  173,  190 

"Androcles  and  the  Lion,"  55 

Anglin,  Margaret,  218 

Antoine,  60 

Archer,  Wm.,  58 

Arnold,  Matthew,  58 

"Arraignment  of  Paris,  The," 
103 

Art  Institute  (Chicago),  66 

"Art  of  Playwriting,  The," 
104 

Art  of  theater,  Chapter  XIII 

Arthur,  Helen,  164 

Arts  and  Crafts  Guild  of  De- 
troit, 202-205 

Arvold,  A.  G.,  72 

"As  You  Like  It,"  125 

Audience,  15,  128,  219 


Austin,  Mrs.  Mary,  121 

Baker,  G.  P.,  106-109,  164,  202 

Bandbox  Theatre,  76,  174-177, 
208 

Barker,  Granville,  55 

Barnsdall,  Aline,  208 

Belasco,  David,   121 

£elmont,  Mrs.  Eleanor  Rob- 
son,  127 

Bennett,  Arnold,  54 

Benrimo,  218 

Benson,  F.  R.,  191 

Berlin  Deutsches  Theater,  35 

Besier,  43 

Bijou  Theatre  (Boston),  123 

Bingham,  Elizabeth,  116 

Bispham,  David,  168 

Blair,  John,  23,  35 

"Blot  on  the  'Scutcheon,  A," 

65 

"Blue  Bird,  The,"  123 
Bonstelle,  Jessie,  41,  43 
Booth,  Geo.  C,  202 
Brady,  W.  A.,  121 
Bramhall    Theatre,    78,   211- 

212 

Brookline  Amateurs,  132 
Brooklyn  Institute,  201 
Brooklyn  Repertory  Theatre, 

201 

Browne,  Maurice,  145-150 
Brownsville,  211 


245 


246 


INDEX 


Browning,  65 

Building  Laws,  89 

Bulletin,  Playgoing — Com- 
mittee— ,  49 

Burke,  Melville,  207 

Burnett,  Mrs.  Frances  Hodg- 
son, 122 

Business-getting,   18,  218-219 

Button,  Wm.  B.,  211 

"By- Products,"  54 

Cambridge     Social    Dramatic 

Club,  132 

"Canterbury  Pilgrims,"  192 
Carmel-by-the-Sea,    213 
Carnegie    Institute    of   Tech- 
nology    (  Pittsburg) ,     1 10- 

H5 

Carnegie  Lyceum  (N.  Y.); 
1 20 

Castle  Square  Theatre  (Bos- 
ton), 38,  152 

Century  Theatre  (N.  Y.), 
122 

Chicago,  29-35,  61,  67,  116, 
120 

Chicago  Theatre  Society,  32, 
34-35,  S3.  64 

Child-labor   and   the   theatre, 

*> 

Children's  Educational  Thea- 
tre, 125-126 

Children's  Playhouse  (Co- 
lumbus, Ohio),  121 

Children's  theatre,  Chapter 
VIII 

Children's   Theatre    (N.   Y.), 

I2O-I22,    l6o 

Christadora  House   (N.  Y.), 

160,  195 
Cincinnati,  209 
Clement,  Mrs.  Josephine,  123 


Cleveland  Little  Theatre,  210 
Clinton,  Hall  (N.  Y.),  164 
Coburn,  Mr.  and  Mrs.  C.  D., 

191-194,  217 
College    performances,     103- 

110 
Colonial  Theatre  (Pittsfield), 

38 

Columbia  University,  211 
Comedy    Theatre     (N.     Y.), 

177-178 

"Coming  of  Peace,  The,"  65 
"Comus,"  66 

Copley  Square  Theatre,   139 
Crafton,  Jesse,  210 
Craig,  Gordon,  55,  147-148 
Cranbrook  Masque,  202 

Daly,  Arnold,  23,  218 

Davenport,  Butler,  211-212 

Davis,  Michael  M.,  58 

Dickens,  120 

"Don!"  43 

Drama  League  of  America, 
46-47,  50-51,  68-70,  120,  198 

Drama  League  of  Duluth,  210 

Drama  Players  (Chicago), 
32,  64,  67 

Drama  Society  of  New  York, 
50 

Dramatic  Club  Henry  St. 
Settlement,  164 

Dramatic  Museum  (Colum- 
bia), 104 

Duluth,  210 

Dunsany,  I,  37,  167,  173,  197 

Dymow,  Ossip,  208 

East  and  West  Players,  168, 

211 
East  Orange,  211 


INDEX 


247 


Easton,  Mrs.  D.  E.  F.,  120 
Economics  of  theatre,   15-21, 

221 

Educational  Alliance  of  New 
York  City,  125,  160 

Educational  Dramatic  League 
(N.  Y.),  125,  126-127 

Educational  Theatre  for 
Schools,  63 

"Electra,"  193 

"Elga,"  36 

Elser,  196 

English  stock  company,  35 

Erie,  211 

Euripides,  193,  195 

Evanston,  111.,  46 

"Everyman,"  191,  208 

Exhibition  of  Arts  of  Thea- 
tre, 55 

"Exploitation  of  Pleasure,  a 
Study  of  Commercial  Rec- 
reations in  New  York 
City,"  58 

Fargo  (N.  D.),  72 

Faversham,  218 

Fine  Arts  Theatre  (Chicago), 
35,  65 

Fiske,  Mrs.,  23,  218 

Footlights  Club  of  Jamaica 
Plains,  132 

Ford,  Marcus,  209 

Forest  Theatre  (Carmel-by- 
the-Sea),  213 

47  Workshop,  106-109 

"Free"  theatre,  61 

Freie  Btihne,  German,  60 

"Friar  Bacon  and  Friar  Bun- 
gay,"  103 

Frohman,  Chas.,  79 

Fry,  Emma  Sheridan,  125, 
126 


Gale,   Mrs.   Lyman   W.,   132- 

135,  139 

Galesburg,  111.,  210 
Garrick    Theatre    (Chicago), 

65 

German  Stock  Co.,  143 
Germany,  "free"  theatres  in, 

61-62 
"Get-Rich-Quick        Walling'- 

ford,"  37 
"Ghosts,"  36,  178 
"Glittering  Gate,  The,"  173 
"Gods  of  the  Mountain,  The," 

i 

"Good  Little  Devil,  A,"  121 
Goodman,  Edward,   182,  183- 

184 

Grand  Forks,  72 
"Granny  Maumee,"  54 
Greenwich    Village    Theatre, 

213 

Greet,  Ben,  190-191 
Griswold,  Grace,  116 

Hapgood,  Mrs.  Emilie,  54,  55 
Harrison,  Bertram,  41 
Harvard,  105-109 
Hauptmann,  23,  65 
Hennequin,  Prof.,  104 
Henry      Street      Settlement, 

160-164 

Herne,  James  A.,  30 
Herts,  A.  Minnie,  125 
Hertz-Heniger,   Mrs.   A.   M., 

121,  125 

"Honeymoon,  The,"  54 
Hopkins,  Arthur,  218 
Hopp,  Julius,  62-63 
Horniman  Company,  60 
Horniman,  Miss,  35,  141 
House  of  Play   (Wash.),  120 
Hull  House  Settlement,  61 


INDEX 


Hull  House  Theatre,  65 
Hume,  Sam,  55,  202-205 

Ibsen,  23,  35,  65 

"Ingomar,"  125 

"Iphigenia  in  Taurus,"   103 

Irish  Players,  35,  60,  133 

Irish  Theatre,  60,  213 

Irish  Theatre   (Chicago),  35 

Irving  Place  Theatre  (N.  Y.), 

36 
"It  Pays  to  Advertise,"  37 

Janney,  196 

Jay,  Mrs.  Harriet,  140 

Jerome,  Jerome  K.,  175 

"Jew  of  Malta,  The,"  103 

Jewett,  Henry,  139 

John    Herron    Art    Institute, 

207 

Jones,  H.  A.,  58 
Jones,  R.  E.,  55,  217 

Kammerspiele   (Berlin),  77 
Kansas    City    Comedy    Club, 

208 

Kingston,  Gertrude,  168 
Kingsway     Theatres      (Lon- 
don), 77 
"Knight  of  the  Burning  Pes 

tie,  The,"  103 
Koch,  F.  H.,  72 

Law  and  the  theatre,  Chapter 
VI 

Lemaitre,  Jules,  175 

Le  Moyne,  Mrs.  Sarah  Co- 
well,  164 

Lewisohn,  Alice,  164 

Lewisohn,  Irene,  164 

License  fees,  19,  91-92 


Lime  Street  House  (Bos- 
ton), 135 

Little  Country  Theatre  of 
North  Dakota  Agricultural 
College,  72 

Little  Playhouse  (Cincin- 
nati), 209 

Little  Playhouse  Theatre  (St. 
Louis),  206-207 

Little  theatre,  Chapter  V, 
Chapter  XII,  216,  220,  224 

Little  Theatre   (Chicago),  34, 

77,  145-150 

Little  Theatre  (London),  77 
Little    Theatre     (Los    Ange- 
les), 208 
Little   Theatre    (N.    Y.),   76, 

78,  121,  153-159 

Little  Theatre    (Phila.),  140- 

145' 

Little  Theatre  Players  (Den- 
ver), 209 

Little  Theatre  Players  (Roch- 
ester), 211 

Little  Theatre  Society  of  In- 
diana, 207 

"Little  Women,"  121 

London  Independent  Theatre, 
60 

London  Stage  Society,  53 

Lord,  Katharine,  121 

Los  Angeles,  120,  208,  209 

Lyceum  Bureaus,  198 

Lyman,  Edw.  H.  R.,  41 

MacDowell     Club     of     New 

York  City,  46 
MacKaye,  Percy,  192 
Madison  (Wis.),  71 
Maeterlinck,  37 
"Man  Who  Married  a  Dumb 

Wife,  The,"  55 


INDEX 


249 


Manchester     (England),     60, 

140 

Mapes,  Victor,  29 
"Margaret  Fleming,"  30 
"Marriage   of   Wit  and   Sci- 
ence, The,"  103 
Masefield,  54 
Masseck,  Clinton  J.,  207 
McCallum,  George,  210 
Metropolitan  Dramatic 

School,  140 
"Midsummer  Night's  Dream, 

A,"  55 
Milton,  66 
Milwaukee,  71,  116 
"Miser,  The,"  65 
Modern  Stage,  35,  36,  63 
Moliere,  65 
Morgan,  Agnes,  164 
Morningside  Players,  211 
Municipal     theatre      (North- 
ampton), 40-42 
Murray,  Gilbert,  193 
Music  Hall  (Chicago),  65 


Nashville,  211 

National  Federation  of  The 

atre  Clubs,  56 
""/Neighborhood          Playhouse 

(N.  Y.),  123,  160-171,  204 

217 

New  England,  38-43 
New  Theatre    (Chicago),  29 

34,  53 
v-New  Theatre  (N.  Y.),  26-28, 

52,  53,  122,  153,  154 
New  York,  35-36,  47,  51,  53 

62,  116,  Chapter  X 
New    York    City    Federation 

of  Women's  Clubs,  56 
New  York  Play  Actors,  174 


Nine         O'Clock         Theatre 

(N.  Y.),  211 
"Nju,"  208 
North     Dakota     Agricultural 

College,  72 
Northampton,     Mass.,    40-43, 

2IO 

Northampton  Theatre,  38 

"CEdipus  Tyrannus,"  103 
Old  and  new  theatre,  Chapter 

I 

"Old  Wives'  Tale,"  103 
O'Neill,  Eugene,  210 
Ordynski,  Richard,  208 

Pabst  Theatre    (Milwaukee), 

36 

Pailleron,  65 
"Pariah,"  173 
Parke,  Wm.,  38-39 
Patrick,  Mrs.  F.  A.,  210 
Patterson,  J.  M.,  54 
Payne,  B.  Iden,  35,   114,  143, 

217 

Peele,  103 

Pelham,  Laura  Dainty,  61 
People's   Institute,   127 
People's  Theatre  (N.  Y.),  36, 

52 

"Peter  Pan."  123 
Philadelphia,  73-74,  140 
Pittsburg,  211 

Pittsfield  Theatre,  38-39,  42 
Platt,  Livingston,  136 
Plautus,  104 
Players    (Providence,  R.   I.), 

209 
Players  of  Newton   (Mass.), 

132 

Players'      Workshop      (Chi- 
cago), 116 


INDEX 


Playhouse   (Milwaukee),  209 
Playhouse,     The     (Chicago), 

65 
Plays      and      Players      Club 

(Phila.),  73-74 
Poel,  Wm.,  114 
"Poor  Little  Thing,"  175 
Portland  (Ore.),  211 
Portland  Stock  Company,  38 
Portmanteau  theatre  (N.  Y.), 

160 
Prairie  Playhouse  (Galesburg, 

111.),  210 
Princess  Theatre  (N.  Y.),  76, 

78,  173 
Production,  cost  of,  19 

difficulties  of,  20 
Progressive  Stage  Society,  62, 

63 
^'rovincetown  Players,  55,  206 

Public     Recreation     Commis- 
sion (Columbus,  Ohio),  121 

Punch     and     Judy     Theatre 
(N.  Y.),  76,  78,  175 

"Rackety- Packety  House,"  122 
Radcliffe,  107 

"Ralph   Roister  Doister,"   103 
Rand   School   of   Social   Sci- 
ence, 173 
Ravinia  Park,  66 
Ravinia    Theatre    (Chicago), 

65 
Recreation    League    of    San 

Francisco,  120 
Reicher,  Emanuel,  35-36,  63 
Reicher,  Frank,  143 
Reinhardt,  Max,  55 
Rent,  17 

Richmond  Hill,  211 
Robertson,      Donald,     30-34, 

63-67,  74,  "4 


Rosenfeld,  Sydney,  56 
"Rosmersholm,"  36,  65 
Rostand,  Mme.  Edmond,  121 
Royalty,  18 
Russell,  Annie,  143 

Sage  Foundation,  59 

St.  Louis  Society  for  Promo- 
tion of  Drama,  207 

Salaries,  18 

Salt  Lake  City,  211 

San  Francisco,  120 

"Sea  Gull,  The,"  178 

School  of  Drama,  Carnegie 
Institute  of  Technology 
(Pittsburg),  110-115 

Schuster-Martin,  Mrs.  Helen, 
209 

Shaw,  G.  B.,  23,  143 

Shaw,  Mary,  23,  35,  218 

Shaw,  Robert  Gould,  Theatre 
Collection  (Harvard),  104 

Shelton,  F.  H.,  140 

Sherry,  Laura,  116 

Shirley,  103 

Small  cities,  theatre  in,  36-43 

"Snow  White,"  121,  125 

Stage  Society,  The  N.  Y.,  53- 

55 

Stamford,  212 
Stevens,  T.  W.,  no,  113 
Stewart,  Mrs.  J.  A.,  210 
Strindberg,  173 
Sturgis,  Granville  F.,  209 
Stuyvesant        Fish        House 

(N.  Y.),  126 
Subsidizing   theatre,    Chapter 

II 

Sunday  performance,  92-95 
Support  of  theatre,  15-21 
Survey,  The,  58 
Sylvan  Theatre  (Wash.),  213 


INDEX 


Talma     Club     (Providence), 

132,  209 

"Tempest,  The,"  125 
Terence,  104 
Theatre     Frangais     d'Amer- 

iqu.e,  143 

Theatre  des  Arts  (Paris),  77 
Theatre  of  Arts  and  Letters, 

59 

Theatre  League,  63 

Torrence  Ridgely,  54 

Toy    Theatre    (Boston),    77, 

133-139 

"Tragedy  of  Nan,  The,"  54 
"Triumph    of    Youth,    The," 

65 

Twain,  Mark,  126 
"Two  Noble  Kinsmen,  The," 

103 
Tyler,  Geo.  C,  121-122 


University  of  N.  D.,  72 
University  of  Pa.,  104 
University   Theatre   Associa- 
tion, 192,  198 

Unproduced    American    play- 
wright, 52-53 


Vagabond      Players      (Balti- 
more), 77,  206 
Vanderbilt,  W.  K.,  122 


Van  Volkenburg,  Ellen,  145 
Volkstheater,  35 

Wage  Earners'  Theatre,  The, 

36,  63 

Walker,   Stuart,   123,   194-198 
Wallack  Theatre  (N.  Y.),  55 
Washington,  213 
Washington  Centre  of  Drama 

League,  120 
*J$ashington    Square    Players, 

78,    143,    171-185,   204,    217, 

219 

"Weavers,  The,"  36 
Weston  (Mass.),  132 
"When      the      Young     Vine 

Blooms,"  36 
Wisconsin,  70-71,  116 
Wisconsin   Dramatic   Society, 

70-71 

Wisconsin  Players,  116,  209 
Wolfe,  Mrs.  Georgia,  120 
Woman's    National    Theatre, 

213 
Workshops,  theatre : 

Chicago,  116 

47  (Harvard),  106-109 

New  York,  116-117 

Wisconsin,  116 

Yale,  104 
Yeats,  60 
Yiddish  plays,  211 


UCLA-College  Library 

PN  2267  D56i 


L  005  680  487  5 


UCSOUTHERN.REG10NALLIBRARYFACIUy 


College 
Library 


PN 

22*7 

D#i 


^l-i 


